Content uploaded by Snježana Kordić
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Snježana Kordić on Jan 05, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
9 Ideology
Against Language
The
Current
Situation
in South Slavic
Countries
Snjeiana
Kordil
The European
Charter for Regional
or Minority Languages
The European
Charter for Regional
or Minority Languages
is a European conven-
tion for the protection
and
promotion of languages
used by traditional minorities.
Together with the Framework
Convention
for the Protection
of National Minori-
ties,
it constitutes the Council of Europe's
legal
mechanism for protecting
national
minorities
(The
European Charter 2019). The
Charter was adopted
as a convention
in June 1992
by the Committee
of Ministers of the Council of Europe and opened
for signature in Sffasbourg in November 1992.lt entered into force in March 1998
(The European Charter 2019).
The Charter says
that contracting
States shall base
their
policies,
legislation
and
practice
on some
objectives and
principles,
which in
the field of education
include
'the provision
of appropriate forms
and means for the
teaching
and study of regional or minority languages
at all appropriate
stages', that
is, in pre-schooleducation,
primary education, secondary education,
university and
other higher education
(The European Charter
1992).
The Charter defines
a regional
or minority language in Article I as follows:
regional or minority languages means languages
that are: i) traditionally
used
within a given territory of a State by nationals
of that State
who form
a group numerically smaller than the rest of the State's
population;
and ii)
different from the official language(s)
of that State; it does not include
either
dialects of the official language(s)
of the State or the languages
of migrants.
(The European
Charter 1992)
According to the above definition, the languages
of an American English-
speaking minority in Britain and an Austrian German-speaking
minority in
Germany would not be regarded
as minority languages
because a minority lan-
guage
does not include dialects
(or other varieties)
of the official language as
they
are
not different enough
from the official language(s)
of the State. The Charter has
been ratified by 25 European
states,
including Croatia (1997) and Serbia
(2006)
(Chart
of Signatures
2019).
DOI : I
0.43241978
I
003034025-
I I
168 Snjeiana Kordil
The
Case
of Croatia
In the
Croatian Constitution,22 national minorities are
explicitly enumerated and
recognized,
among which are
ltalians, Hungarians, Germans
and Bosniaks, Mon-
tenegrins and Serbs
(Ustav
Republike Hrvatske
2019).
Croatia
requires 33Yo of
the
minority
population
in certain
local
government
units
for obligatory
inffoduc-
tion of official use of minority
languages. There
are about 20 explicitly recognized
minority languages, among
which are ltalian,
Hungarian,
German and Bosnian,
Montenegrin and Serbian.
t
Yet there is a language
problem,
whose roots
go
back
to
the 1990s. In
the 1990s,
Bosniaks, Croats, Montenegrins and
Serbs
were at war
with each
other,
when
their
common
state Yugoslavia
dissolved.
Even no% many
years
after
the end
of the
war, distrust and nationalism continue to persist
among
them.
It affects
their rela-
tionship to language, especially because in the early 1990s,
under the influence
of nationalism, many
South
Slavic
linguists began
to argue that
each nation must
have
its own language, and
if there are any language
differences
so
that
one
can
tell where
a
person
comes
from,
it is
a
different
language despite being
completely
intelligible.
These
claims are,
of course, incorrect,
which is well known from the
linguistic situation of English-speaking
or
German-speaking nations
and counffies.
The existence of such claims among
linguists
is an example of 'politicisation
of
language and
also
of linguistics
and
philology, which were
expected to fortiS the
nations
and their nation-states than rather to lend
themselves to objective research'
(Kamusella200l:235).
Differences in the standard
language between Bosniaks, Croats, Montene-
grins and Serbs are
less significant
than those between
the variants
of English,
German,
Dutch or Hindu-Urdu
(Mclennan
1996:
107; Pohl 1996:219; Grtischel
2003 : 1 80-1 8 1
; Thomas 2003 : 3 14, 31 8; Blum
2002:
125-126). Consequently,
the
mutual intelligibility between
their speakers
'exceeds
that between
the standard
variants
of English, French,
German,
or Spanish'(Thomas
2003:325). Even if the
existing
mutual
intelligibility is not
taken into account,
'an examination
of all the
major 'levels' of language
shows
that BCS is clearly a single language'
(Bailyn
2010:190-191).
Furthermore,
a comprehensive analysis
of lexical layers of iden-
tity reveals that
'lexical
differences
between
the ethnic
variants
are extremely lim-
ited, even
when compared with those between
closely
related
Slavic languages
(such
as
standard
Czech and
Slovak,
Bulgarian and Macedonian),
and
grammatical
differences are even
less
pronounced.
More importantly,
complete understanding
between the ethnic
variants
of the standard
language makes translation
and
sec-
ond language
teaching
impossible',
leading
the author'to consider it a
pluricentric
standard language'
(Sipt<a
2019 I 66).
Since
the
South
Slavic
language situation
is sometimes
compared to the
Scan-
dinavian one, it should be noted
that the
mutual intelligibility between
the
stand-
ard varieties spoken
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croati4 Montenegro
and
Serbia
is
at the highest level,
meaning
that it is significantly higher
than between spoken
standard
Danish, Norwegian and
Swedish.
Research
conducted
by the
Nordic
Cul-
ture Fund
(Nordiska
kulturfonden) and
the
Nordic
Council
of Ministers
(Nordiska
Ideologt
Against Language 169
ministerrddet)
from2002
to 2005 with native speakers of Danish, Norwegian
and
Swedish
under the age of 25 showed
that Copenhagen's
youth understand
only
360/o of spoken Swedish
and
4lo/o
of spoken
Norwegian;
Oslo's
youth
understand
7lo/o of spoken
Swedish
and
650/o of spoken
Danish; Stockholm's
youth under-
stand
55%
of spoken Nonvegian
and34o/o of spoken
Danish
(Delsing
and Lundin-
Akesson
2005:65).2
In sociolinguistics,
there
is a term for a language like English or German:
it is
a pluricentric
(or polycentric)
standard
language,
which
means
a language
spoken
by several nations in several states,
with recognizable
variants
(Gluck
2000: 535;
Clyne
et al. 2003:95).
Each nation
or state is one
center,
providing
a distinctive
national
standard
variety.
The national standard
varieties
do differ in
pronunciation,
vocabulary
spelling, but they are
mutually intelligible
and therefore
considering
them
as different
languages
would not be
justified (BuBmann
2002: 521-522).3
English is a pluricentric
language,
German
as well, Spanish, Dutch,
French, Por-
tuguese,Arabic, Hindu-Urdu,
Malay and
many
others
(Clyne
1992). The language
spoken
in Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Croatia,
Montenegro
and Serbia is
also a
pluricen-
tric language,
with four centers
and four national
varieties
(Brozovi( 1992:347-
380; Msrk 2002: unpaginated in Preface; Bundid 2008: 93; Zanelli
2018:
2021;
Pennington
2021: 125).4 That is not really disputable:
'Linguistic scientists
are
agreed
that
BCSM is
essentially a
single
language
with four
different
standard
vari-
ants
bearing different
names'
(Trudgill
2017 : 46).
Describing
a language
as
pluricentric
is not something new,
because
the soci-
olinguistic
theory
of pluricentric
languages
emerged
in the 1960s,
when it was
applied in various parts
of the world to the description of the Spanish
national
varieties and
English national
varieties
(Ammon
1995:
4249).It is interesting
that
at
that
time,
the
most
prominent
Croatian linguists
applied it to the description of
the Serbo-Croatian language
(Babii 1964;Brozovi6 1965;
Jonke 1968-1969: 13l).
The theory was commonly accepted
among
South Slavic
linguists
for decades,
until the 1990s. Since
then,
the theory of pluricentric
languages
as a sociolinguis-
tic adequate
way of describing the domestic
language
situation has
been silenced
because
of
nationalism.s
Nationalist ideology
wants to convince
people
that the four
peoples
are
crucially
different in origin, history language,
etc. and therefore must be separated from
each other. To implement
the
separation
even
in schools,
the European
Charter
for
Regional
or Minority Languages
is used.
The segregation
of schoolchildren
takes
place
in the
name
of minority language rights,
although
the Charter reads that
a
minority
language must
be different from the
official language
and
must not be
a
dialect
of the official language,
and although
the standard
language of Bosniaks,
Croats,
Montenegrins
and
Serbs is based
on the same
dialect
called
Shtokavian
(La5kova
2001
: 20;
Blum 2002:
13
4; Babit,
2004: 1 50; Brozovid
2005 : 194; Mark
2008:
295),
it is
clear that
according to the Charter
it cannot
be regarded
as several
minority languages.
For example, Croats and Serbs
are
still segregated
in the city Vukovar.
The
divisions
are
obvious
in the city two and a
half
decades after
the
war
(Mati6
2018).
Nowhere
is the
policy of ethnic division
more
starkly
apparent
than
in the school
170 Snjeiana
Kordit
system,
where
classrooms are divided along
ethnic lines on the
pretext
of differ-
ent languages.
The political representative of the Serbian minority in the Croa-
tian Parliament
justifies
segregation
by claiming
that 'education
in the minority
language and
script has
no alternative
because
language
and
script
are
key com-
ponents
of any
national
identity'
(KoZul
2021). Children
attend
the same school.
have
the
same
teachers,
and
yet
they
barely
know
each other
as they
do not
go to
class together.
One
group
attends
school in the
morning,
the other in the
afternoon.
Youths
are
being
prevented
from meeting
and
spending
time together.
Separate
classes,
separate
preschools, ethnicity-specific
radio
stations
and even
cafes
(Matii
2018).
The
goal
is
to constantly
reproduce
nationalism
as
the
political
parties
that
are in power
in Croatia, Serbia and
Bosnia-Herzegovina
came to power
by means
of nationalism.
By reproducing nationalism
they reproduce
their voters.
Ethnic
segregation suits them
quite
well, as
it solidifies
ethnic
divisions and
breeds fear
and
mistrust
(HadZiristit,
20
l7).
The Case
of Serbia
In Serbia, more than2} minorities
exist, among
which are Bosniaks, Croats, and
Montenegrins
(Rezultati popisa
2013).
Under
the accord
on the
rights of minori-
ties
in Europe that Serbia
signed on to, and a subsequent
national law, there have
been separate Croatian
classes
in
primary
and secondary schools since 2002,on
the
pretext
of different languages
(HINA 2018a,2018b).
Bosniaks,
who are the third largest of the minorities
in Serbia, followed suit
(Rezultati
popisa
2013). They live mainly in the southwestern region of Serbia
known as SandZak. ln 2013,
primary and secondary
schools in SandZak have
started
dividing classes
along ethnic
lines.
Bosniak students
are taught in sepa-
rate
classrooms,
on the
pretext
of speaking
a different language,
even though,
in
2004,the
Organization for Security
and Co'operation in Europe
(OSCE)
released a
statement
that
'the Mission
does
not support
a division
of the
society
along ethnic
lines on the basis
of claims
that refer to the right to learn one's
mother
tongue'
(OSCE
Belgrade
Mission
2004).In
2005, the
International
Crisis Group
wrote
in
a report that
separate
classrooms
'will cause students
to divide
further
on the basis
of religion
and ethnicity.
The result
will be further
polarisation
and
self-imposed
ethnic
apartheid,
as
Serbs
attend one set of classes and
Bosniaks
another'(Interna-
tional Crisis
Group
2005: 3l). It 'is rapidly
undermining
peaceful
coexistence in
SandZak'. The same report reads
that 'Serbs,
Croats,
Bosniaks
and
Montenegrins
all speak a common tongue
with several
dialects and numerous
sub-dialects,
which
have always
been regionally, not
ethnically, based.
. . . Serbs,
Croats, Bosniaks and
Montenegrins need no interpreters'(International
Crisis Group
2005: 30).
The
Case
of Bosnia-Hezegovina
Since
the population
of Bosnia-Herzegovina
is composed
of three
constitutive
ethnicities
- Bosniaks, Croats
and
Serbs
- none of them has
the
status
of a minorit-v
in
the
state. ln the
1990s,
the war
between
them led
to children
being
educated with
Ideologt Against Language l7l
different curricula and textbooks
based on their ethnicity and
religion. The edu-
cational
system in Bosnia-Herzegovina is
described as
'probably
one of the least
functional ones in the world'(Brkan
and Dajanovii 2015).
In a country
with only
3.5
million inhabitants, there are
as
many as 13 Ministries of Education
and at least
twelve
different curricula.
Severely
dividedjurisdictions enable extreme
autonomy
in curriculum
making,
with much room for the influence of political ideologies,
which
leads
to problems
and anomalies, among
which the
so-called
'two schools
under one roof'case
is
an
important one
(Brkan
and Dajanovii 2015).
In practice,
this means
that children
from different
ethnic
groups
attend classes in the same
building,
but
physically
separated from each
other on
the
pretext
of speaking
dif-
ferent languages
(Sito-Sudie
2017). Some schools have
fences
preventing
students
socializing
even during
the breaks between
classes
(Surk
2018).
Students in Bosnia-Herzegovina
have
been
protesting
against the segrega-
tion for years,
warning
that it increases inter-ethnic hatred
(Augustinovie
2017).
There is a documentary about
'two schools under one
roof , made in 2009 by the
German non-govenrmental organization
Schiiler
helfen
leben, which was
formed
in the
early
1990s,
when
German students started
a
project
for students in Bosnia-
Herzegovina
during the war.6
Today,
the organization
is still supporting second-
ary school
students
throughout
Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The High
Commissioner on
National Minorities,
the
OSCE
and
other
international organizations strongly sup-
port inclusive
educational
reforms
(A Vision
of Unity 2018).
The Office
of the
High Representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina,
a body charged with maintaining
peace,
has
tried to unite
the
educational
system,
but
with little success
(Brkan
and
Dajanovid 2015).
Ambassador Bruce Berton,
Head
of the OSCE
Mission
to Bosnia-Herzegovina
says:
'Since
the war, the country's education
system
has been
characterized.
by
division
and segregation,
with the vast
majority of children
learning separately
according to 'their' ethno-national
group.
This does not promote
the values
of
a democratic society,
respect for diversrty
or reconciliation.
On the contrary it
entrenches
divisions along ethnic lines, Furthermore, segregated
education
deprives
the children
of this country
from receiving
quality
education
free
from
political,
religious, cultural and other biases'(A
Vision
of Unity 2018).
Japan
ts
Efforts in Bosnia-Herzegovina
Given
that
segregation in Bosnia-Herzegovina is unjustified and expensive, more
expensive
than
improving the quality
of the education, Japan started
the Project
on
Informatics
Curriculum
Modernization
at the Gymnasium
of the
city Mostar
in
Bosnia-Herzegovinain2006. This Gymnasium segregates students
by ethnicity, so
that
children
of Croatian and Bosniak
ethnicity
never
attend classes
together. Based
on informatics
textbooks used
in Japanese high schools,
Japan developed new
text-
books
written in the local language,
allowing both Bosniak
and Croat students
to take
the same informatics
classes under
the same
curriculum
(Japan's
Official
2012). In this way, informatics
classes became the only subject
where
students
of different ethnicities were
studying
together
in the same
classroom at Mostar
172 Snjeiana Kordit
Gymnasium.
Japan donated all the equipment for the classroom and all public
buses in the city.
In 2008,
the Japan
International Cooperation Agency
(JICA) started another
phase of the Project on Informatics Curricula Modernization in Bosnia-
Herzegovina, expanding
it to l8 secondary
schools from across the
country. Refer-
ring to Japanese
high school
textbooks,
teachers of Bosnia-Herzegovina worked
together
to develop
new
textbooks
for informatics.
In next
phase,
in 2010,
JICA
supported development
of common
informatics
curricula
for gymnasia
of all eth-
nicities
(Homma
2010).
Since
good
teachers
are essential
for learning, JICA held
seminars for teachers
in charge
of informatics
at
gymnasia
in Bosnia-Herzegovina
and even invited
school
teachers
from Bosnia-Herzegovina
to Japan
for training
(Homma
2010).
JICA says
on its
website that one of the
important steps in improv-
ing
the
peaceful
co-existence among the
diverse
ethnic and
religious
factions is
to
educate
all children
of Bosnia-Herzegovina with the same curricula and textbooks
regardless
of ethnicity
(Homma
2010).7
Efforts
of South
Slavic Intellectuals Issuing
the
Declaration on the
Common
Language
Another attempt to end the
segregation in Bosnia-Herzegovin4
Croatia and
Serbia
is a Declaration
on
the
Common Language
n 2017.It was
issued by a group
of
intellectuals andnon-govemmental
organizations from
Bosnia-Herzegovin4
Croa-
tia, Montenegro
and
Serbia"
working
on a
project
called
Language and
National-
ism.
Before any
public presentation,
the
Declaration
has been
signed by over
two
hundred
prominent
scientists,
writers,
journalists,
activists and other
public
figures
from the four countries
(Trudglll2017:46). After being
published,
it received a
warm welcome
from ordinary
people (Milekid
2017)
and
made headlines
all over
the
region
(Derk
2017:6-7;
Tripunovski 2017:30; Potpi5ite ako 2017; Proditajte
tekst 2017;
Deklarac4u
o 2017).
Some
linguists from
abroad
have signed too
(i.e.,
Greville
Corbett, Ronelle
Alexander,
John Frederick Bailyn, Anders
Ahlqvist, Spi-
ros
Moschonas, Camiel
Hamans, Joachim Mugdan,
Costas Canakis,
James Joshua
Pennington)
(Lista potpisnika).
The British
sociolinguist Peter
Trudgill notes
that
'linguists
are
well represented on the list of signatories'
(Trudgill2017).
Noam
Chomsky
has
also
signed
the
Declaration
(Vudii
2018;
Ikaji5nik 2018).
The Declaration is
seen
as an attempt to stimulate
a
more rational
public
discus-
sion on language
(Is Serbo-Croatian
2017) as it states
that
Bosniaks,
Croats,
Serbs
and Montenegrins
have
'a common
standard
language of the
polycentric
type
- one
spoken
by several
nations
in several
states,
with
recognizable
variants,
such as
Ger-
man, English, Arabic,
French, Spanish, Portuguese
and many others.
This fact is
corroborated
by Stokavian
as
the common
dialectal
basis of the
standard language,
the
ratio
of same
versus
different
in the
language,
and the consequent
mutual
com-
prehensibility'(Proditajte
tekst
2017).
Taking
into
account
the irrational
fear
that a
common
language
could
jeopardize
the
existence
of a separate nation
or state, the
Declaration emphasizes that
the common
polycentric
language
'does
not
question
the individual
right to express
belonging
to different
nations, regions or states'.
Ideolog,, Against Language 173
Finally, the Declaration
provides
a clear
critique
of the
negative
consequences of
current
language
policy:
'Insisting
on the small number of existing
differences
and
on the forceful separation of the four standard
variants
causes
numerous nega-
tive social,
cultural
and
political phenomena.
These include using
language
as an
argument
justifuing
the
segregation
of schoolchildren
in some
multi-ethnic
envi-
ronments,
unnecessary
'translation'
in adminisffation
or
the
media, inventing
dif-
ferences
where they do
not exist,
bureaucratic coercion, as
well
as censorship
(and
necessarily also self-censorship)'
(Proditajte
tekst 20
I
7).
The
Declaration
is also
viewed as an
attempt
to counter nationalistic divisions
(Milekii 2017) and to contribute to the
reconciliation
process (Is Serbo-Croatian
2017),
as
it calls
for'abolishing
all forms of linguistic segregation and discrimina-
tion in
educational and
public
institutions'(Proditajte
tekst
2017).It advocates
'the
freedom
of individual choice and respect for linguistic diversity'
(Proditajte
tekst
2017).8 As might be expected, some domestic
politicians
with
a
nationalist
agenda
expressed
dissatisfaction with
the Declaration
(Mileki6
2017), but
some other
poli-
ticians of different
nationalities signed
the Declaration
(Lista
potpisnika).
Conclusion
As
shown in this chapter, there is a large discrepancy between the
linguistic
reality
and
the language
politics
and
relevant
legislation
in South Slavic
countries.
On
the
one hand,
according to all criteria, the linguistic reality
can
be described as
a typi-
cal pluricentric
standard language
with four standardized
varieties.
On the other
hand, schoolchildren
are
being segregated
in Bosnia-Herzegovina
as
if they speak
different languages. In Croatia
and Serbia, segregation
takes
place
in the name
of minority language rights, ignoring
that the European
Charter
for Regional
or
Minority Languages
gives
a clear definition
of a minority
language
that excludes
the
term
'minority
language'in this case.
There
have been affempts for years
to end
the segregation. A few months
after
the
publication
of the Declaration on the Common
Language,
representatives
of
all secondary
school students from Bosnia-Herzegovina
protested
in front of the
Parliament building
in Sarajevo against
language-based
segregation
and
managed
to
prevent
the
opening of a
new school
that was
supposed
to implement
segregation
(FENA
2017;
Sokolovii
2017).In November 2018, the OSCE
gave
an interna-
tional award to students
who staged
protests
and
succeeded
in stopping
the pro-
posed
ethnic segregation of a school in the
Bosnian
town
of Jajce
(Srednjo5kolci
iz lajca
2018).
There
are also attempts by some
Bosnian
politicians to end language-based seg-
regation.
This is
expected
because
a
dozen
Bosnian
parliamentarians,
including
the
vice
president
of the Federation
of Bosnia-Herzegovina, signed
the Declaration,
which calls for
the abolition
of language-based
segregation
(Lista
potpisnika).
One
ofthe
signatories
of Croatian
ethnicity became the
president
of Bosnia-Herzegovina
in
the
next
elections
(KomSiC:
Vjeran
2018). After
the
publication
of the Declara-
tion,
the
Social
Democratic Party
of Bosnia-Herzegovina
drafted
a Bill amending
the
Framework Law on
primary
and secondary education in Bosnia-Herzegovina,
174 Snjeiana
Kordit
with the aim of ending
language-based
segregation,
and organized roundtables
throughout
Bosnia-Herzegovina
to
publicly
discuss the
Bill (SDP
predstavio
2017).
ln20l8, in a
proposal
for an
informal document,
the
Stabilization
and
Associa-
tion Council
between the
European Union and Bosnia-Herzegovina called for the
abolition
of 'two schools under
one roof in Bosnia-Herzegovina
(Karabegovid
2018).
In July 2021.
the Constitutional
Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina found
that
'two schools under
one roof were discriminatory
(Augustinovid
and Milojevid
2021).
Commenting on the
Constitutional Court's
ruling, the competent
Minister
of Education said
that
a different
practice
is not
possible:
'If we want
to guarantee
the
right of every child
to attend classes in their
mother
tongue, at this
moment it is
inevitable that
two schools
will be in one
school
building, because
we don't have
enough school buildings'(Augustinovid and
Milojevii 2021). This is
an
example
of how in Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Croatia and Serbia
'linguistic human rights
dis-
course,
despite its conscious
goal
of preventing
discrimination,
has actually helped
legitimize
ethnic divisions'(Pupavac 2006:
ll3). Nevertheless, it is obvious
that
the
process
of deconstructing
the existing situation has begun,
ild the Declaration
on
the
Common Language played
a role in this, as it managed to acquaint the
gen-
eral
public
with the
(socio)linguistically
based
description
of the language.
Notes
I Only in
Montenegro,
there
is
no such segregation
of
schoolchildren.
2 In
the
Slavic
are4 there
is
one
instance
of a
significant
asymmetric
intelligibility:
Slo-
venians
understand
Croats
better
(79.4o/o)
than Croats understand
Slovenians
(3.7%)
(Gooskens
et
al. 2017:
183).
3 For more on mutual
intelligibility and
why
it is
the
primary
(socio)linguistic
criterion
sep-
arating different languages
from
varieties
of
a language.
see Gr0schel
(2009:
132-l5l).
For more
on
the
measurement
of mutual intelligibility, see Casad
(1974),Ammon (1987:
325),
Gooskens
(2013),
Gooskens and
van
Heuven
(2017)
and
Gooskens
et al.
(2017).
4 For
an analysis
of various (socio)linguistic
criteria
involved in that issue,
see
Kordid
(2004,
2007, 20 I
0: 77
-168).
5 Zanelli
(2018)
describes
how
the
Croatian linguistic
journal
Jezik
often holds
views
of
language
nationalism. denies
the
existence
of a
common
language and
uses
metaphors
to manipulate readers.
6 The documentary
has
English subtitles
and can
be
viewed
on YouTube
(Documentary
200e).
7 In the
whole
region
of the Western
Balkans
(Albani4 Bosnia
and
Herzegovin4 Croa-
tia, Kosovo,
Montenegro, North
Macedoni4 Serbia), Japan has
provided
assistance
on
consolidation
of peace,
economic development, and
regional
cooperation
in accordance
with the conclusions
of the Ministerial
Conference on Peace Consolidation and Eco-
nomic Development
of the Westem
Balkans,
which was
held
jointly by Japan
and the
EU in 2004
(Japan's
Official
2012).
8 For an analysis
of reactions to the
Declaration
on the
Common Language,
see
KordiC
(201e).
References
Ammon, Ulrich. 1987.
Language
- Variety/Standard Variety
- Dialect
(pp.
31G334). In:
Ulrich
Ammon et
al., eds.
Sociolinguistics: An International
Handbook
of the
Science of
Language and
Society. Berlin and New York:
Walter
de
Gruyter.
Ideologt Against Language 175
Ammon, Ulrich. 1995.
Die deutsche
Sprache
in Deutschland, Osterreich
und der
Sclmeiz:
das Problem der nationalen
Varietriten
fThe German
Language
in Germany, Austria
and
Switzerland.:
The Problem
of National VarietiesJ.
Berlin and
New York: Walter de
Gruyter.
Augustinovic, Marija.
2017.
Srednjo5kolci
u Jajcu ostaju zajedno:
Vlasti
odustale od nove
Skole
[Secondary
School Students
in Jajce Stay
Together: Authorities Dropped
the New
Schooll. Radio Slobodru Evropa.
l7 Jun.
www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/srednjoskolci-u-
j aj
cu-ostaj u-zaj
edno-u-klupama/2 85 60287. htrn l. Accessed
: Sept 8,
20
I 9.
Augustinovid,
Marija and Milorad Milojevid. 2021.
Ustavna
diskriminacija
u 'dvije Skole
pod
jednim
krovom'
[Constitutional
Discrimination in 'Two Schools Under One
Roof'].
Radio Slobodna
Evropa. 4 Aug. www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/ustavni-sud-bih-odluka-
dvije-skole-pod-jednim-krovom/3 I 39
I 59 I .hunl.
Accessed:
Oct 8, 2021.
Babi6,
Sdepan. 196a. Uklanjanje hrvatsko-srpskih
jezidnih razbka
[Removing
Croatian-
Serbian Language
DifferencesJ(pp.7la\. Jezik.
Vol.
ll, No. 3.
Babid, Stjepan.
2004. Hrvanja hrttatskogafCroatian Language
WrestttngJ.Zagreb:
Skolska
knjiga.
Bailyn,
John Frederick.
2010. To What Degree Are Croatian
and
Serbian
the Same
Lan-
guage?
Evidence
from a
Translation Study
(pp. l8l-219). Journal of
Slwic Linguistics.
Vol.
18, No.2.
Blum, Daniel.
2002.
Sprache
und Politik: Sprachpolitik
und
Sprachnationnlismw
in der
Republik Indten und dem
sozialistischen
Jugoslowien
(/,945-/,991)
lLangaage
and
Poli-
tics: Language
Policy and
Language
Nationalism
in the Republic of India and the
Social-
ist Yugoslavia
(/,945-199/,)l
(Ser:
Beitrage zur Siidasienforschung,
Vol. 192).
Wiirzburg:
Ergon.
Brkan,
Darko
and
DamirDajanovii.
2}ls.Influence
of Politics
and ldeology: Three Distinct
Histories Taught
in Bosnia-Herzegovina
Regarding Fascism
andAntifascism.
GONG.
l5
May. www.gong.hr/en/good-governance/european-union/three-distinct-histories-taught-
in-b-h-regarding-fl. Accessed:
Sept
16, 2019.
Brozovii, Dalibor. 1965. O problemima
varijanata
[About the Problems of VariantsJ
(pp.
TaQ. Jezik.
Vol.
13,
No.
2.
BrozoviC, Dalibor. 1992.
Serbo-Croatian
as a Pluricentric
Language
(pp. 347180). In:
Michael Clyne,
ed. Pluricentric
Languages:
Differing Norms
in Diferent Nations. Berlin
and
New
York: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Brozovii, Dalibor. 2005. Prro lice
jednine lThe
First Person Singularl.
Zagreb: Matica
hrvatska.
Bundii, Daniel.
2008.
Die
(Re-)Nationalisierung
der
serbokroatischen
Standards
[The
(Re-)
Nationalisation of Serbo-Croatian StandardsJ
(pp.
8F102). In: Sebastian
Kempgen,
ed.
Deutsche
Beitrcige
zum
14. Internationalen Slwistenkongress,
Ohrid,2008.
Munich: Otto
Sagner.
BuBmann, Hadumod,
ed.2002.
Lexil<on
der Spraclwisseruchaft:
Dritte, aktualisierte
und
erweiterte
Auflage
lLexicon
of Lingistics: Third"
Updated
and Expanded Editionl. Stutt-
gart:
Alfred
Kr0ner.
Casad,
Eugene
H. 1974. Dialect
Inteiligibility Testing
(Ser:
Publications
in Linguistics
and
Related Fields,
Vol.
38).
Oklahoma:
Summer
Institute of Linguistics
of the
University
of
Oklahoma.
Chart
of Signatures
and Ratifications of Treaty 148.
2019.
Council of Europe.
22 Sept.
www.coe.intJenlweb/conventions/full-list/-/conventionsltreaty/148/signatures?p_auth=
bvnvRSWs.
Accessed:
Sept
22, 2019.
Clyne,
Michael, ed. 1992. Pluricentric Languages:
Dffiring Norms in Dtferent Natiow.
Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
176 Snjeiana Kordi|
Clyne, Michael,
Sue Fernandez
and Rudolf Muhr.2003.
Communicative
Styles
in a
Contact
Situation: Two German National
Varieties
in a Third Country
(pp.
95-154).
Journal
of
Germanic
Linguistics.
Vol. 15,
No.
2.
Deklaraciju o zajednidkom
jeziku do sada
potpisalo
8.000
ljudi [So
far,
8.000
People Have
Signed
the Declaration
on the Common Languagel.
2017.
Danas.6 Apr. www.danas.
rs/kultura/deklaraciju-o-zajednickom-jeziku-do-sada-potpisalo-8-000-ljudi/.
Accessed:
Sept
3,
2019.
Delsing, Lars-Olof
and
Katarina Lundin-Akesson.
2005. Hdller sprdket
ihop
Norden? En
forskningsrapport
om ungdomars
fdrstdelse av danslea,
svenska och norska fDoes
the
Language Hold Together
in the Nordic
Countries?
A Research
Report
on Young
Peopleb
Understanding of Danish, SwedishandNorwegian]. Kopenhagen:
Nordiskaministentdet.
Derk, Denis.
2017.
Donosi se Deklaracija o zajednidkom
jeziku Hrvat4 Srb4 Bo5njaka
I Crnogoraca
[A Declaration on the Common
Language of Croats,
Serbs,
Bosniaks
and Montenegrins Is About to Appearl
(pp. G7). Veiernji list.28 Mar.
www.vecernji.
hr/hrvatska/deklaracija-o-zajednickom-jezikt-iz-zagreba-donosi-se-30-ozujka-u-sara
jevu-1159142.
Accessed: Sept
23,
2019.
Documentary.
2009.
www.youtube.com/watch?v:HyffgbSuwEA
(part l); www.youtube.
com/watch?v:fRhUlBrmnRl
(part 2); www.youtube. com/watch?v=SPTw8
SUDbMU
(pa,rt
3).Accessed:
Sept
2, 2019.
The European Charter
for Regional or Minority Languages.
1992.
Council of Europe.
5
Nov.
www.coe.int/enlweb/conventions/full-lisV-/conventions/rms/0900001680695175.
Accessed:
Sept
14,
2019.
The
European Charter for Regional or Minority
Languages.
20
I 9. Council of Europe.
www.
coe.int/erlweb/european-charter-regional-or-minority-languages.
Accessed: Sept
21. 2019.
FENA. 2017.
Protest
srednjo5kolaca
u Sarajevu:
Ne Zelimo
podjele,
nego kvalitetno
obra-
zovanje
[Protest
of Secondary School Students
in Sarajevo:
We
Do Not Want
Divisions
but Quality
Educationl. Radiosarajevo.ba.
l5 Oct.
www.radiosarajevo.ba/vijesti/bosna-
i-hercegovina/protest-srednjoskolaca'u-sarajevu-borimo-se-protiv-podjela-i-zelimo-
kvalitetno-obrazovanj
e127E065 .
Accessed: Sept
I 8, 2019.
Gliick, Helmut,
ed. 2000.
Metzler Lexikon Spraclrc:
2., erweiterte
Auflage
lThe Metzler
Lexicon of Language:
2nd ktended Edifion].
Stuttgart:
J. B. Metzler.
Gooskens,
Charlotte. 2013. Experimental Methods
for Measuring Intelligibility of Closely
Related
Language
Varieties
(pp.
195-213). In: Robert Bayley,
Richard Cameron and Ceil
Lucas, eds. The
Oxford
Handbook
of Sociolinguistics.
Oxford and
New York: Oxford
University Press.
Gooskens, Charlotte and
Vincent
J. van
Heuven.
2017.
Measuring Cross-Linguistic Intel-
ligibility in the Germanic,
Romance and
Slavic
Language Groups
(pp.2546). Speech
C
ommunic
ation.
Vol.
89.
Gooskens, Charlotte,
Vincent
J. van Heuven, Jelena Golubovid,
Anja Schuppert
Femke
Swarte
and Stefanie
Voigt.
2017.
Mutual Intelligibility Between Closely Related Lan-
guages
in Europe
(pp.
169-193). International Journal of
Multilingualism.
Vol.
15, No.
2.
Gr0schel, Bernhard.
2003.
Postjugoslavische Amtssprachenregelungen
- Soziolinguistische
Argumente
gegen
die Einheitlichkeit des Serbokroatischen?
[Post-Yugoslav
Official
Languages Regulations
- Sociolinguistic Arguments
Against Consistency
of Serbo-
Croatian?l
(pp. 135-196). Srpski
jezik. Vol. 8,
No. l-2. https://archive.org/detailslPostju
goslavische_Amtssprachenregelungen_Bernhard_Groeschel_2003/pageln9.
Accessed:
Sept
7, 2019.
Gr0schel,
Bernhard.
2009.
Das Serbol<roatische
zwischen
Linguistik und Politik: Mil
einer Bibliogtaphie
zum
postjugoslavischen
Sprachewtreit
lSerbo-Croatian
Between
Ideologt Against Language 177
Linguistics
and
Politics: Wth a Bibliograplry of the
Post-Yugoslav
Language DisputeJ.
(Ser:
Lincom
Studies in Slavic Linguistics,
Vol.
34).
Munich: Lincom
Europa.
HadZiristid, Tea.
2017.
Two Schools
Under One
Roof:
A Lesson
in Ethnic Unmixing
from
Bosnia's
Segregated
School System. Open
Democracy- 3 Mar. w'rilw.opendemocracy.
net/enlcan-europe-make-it/two-schools-under-one-roof-lesson-in-ethnic-unmixing-from-
bosnia-/. Accessed:
Sept
4,
2019.
HINA. 2018a.
Serbia
to Improve Education
in Croatian Language.
2018.
Total Croatia
News.
27 May.
www.total-croatia-news.com/politicsl28632-serbia-to-expand-education-
in-croatian- language.
Accessed : Sept
24,
20
19
.
HINA. 2018b.
Mixed Results
for Croatian-Language Teaching in Serbia.
2018. Total
Croa-
tia News. 24 Sept.
www.total-croatia-news.com/politics/30814-mixed-results-for-croa
tian-language-teaching-in-serbia.
Accessed: Sept
24,
2019.
Homm4 Kazumi.
2010.
Standardizing Inforrnatics Education
in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Jap
an I
nt e r
nat i
o
na I C o ope
r at i
on A
ge ncy. 24 Aug.
wwwj ica go
jp/balkaniengli
sh/offi
cel
topics/topics I
00824.htm1.
Accessed:
Sept
4,
2019.
International Crisis Group.
2005.
Serbia's
SandZak:
Still Forgotten:
Europe
Report
No.
162. United Natiora Htgh Commissioner
for Refugees.
8 Apr. www.refiuorld.org/
pdfid/425e8bfl4.pdf.
Accessed:
Sept
17,
2019.
Is Serbo-Croatian
a Language?.2017.
The
Economist. l0 Apr. www.economist.com/the-
economist-explains/20
17
l04ll0lis-serbo-croatian-a-language.
Accessed: Sept
3, 2019
.
Japan's Official Development
Assistance
White Paper. 2012.
Ministry of Foreign
lfairs of
Japan.
www.mofa.gojp/policy/oda/whitel2}l2lhtmlhonbun/b3ls2]_O&.html.
Accessed:
Sept
25, 2019.
Jonke, Ljudevit. 196811969.
Osnovni
pojmoviojeziku
Hrvata
i Srba
[Basic
ConceptsAbotrt
the Language
of the
Croats and
the
Serbsl
(pp.
129-134).
Jezik.
Vol. 16, No. 5.
Kamusell4 Tomasz.
2001.
Language
as an Instrument
of Nationalism in Central Europe
(pp.235a5l). Nations
and
Nationalism.
Vol.
7, No.
2.
Karabegovid, DZenana.
2018.
EU traii ukidanje
'dvije Skole
pod
jednim krovom'? pU
Demands
Abolition of 'Two Schools
Under One
Roof?| Radio
Slobodna
Evropa.22
Mar. www.slobodnaevropa.orglaleu-skola-segregacija/29ll3M4.htnl.
Accessed:
Oct
2.
2021.
Kom5i6:
Vjeran sam BiH, a ne Hrvatskoj,
ali ja jesam Hrvat [I am Loyal to Bosnia-
Herzegovin4 not
Croati4
but
I am a CroatJ.
2018. 24sata.l0
Oct.
www.24satahr/news/
komsic-vjeran-sam-bih-a-ne-hrvatskoj-ali-ja-jesam-hrvat-594529.Accessed:
Oct
3, 2021.
Kordii, SnjeZana. 2004.
Pro und kontra:
'Serbokroatisch'
heute
[Pros
and
Cons:
'Serbo-
Croatian'Todayl
(pp.97-la8). In: Marion Krause
and
Christian
Sappolq
eds.
Slavistisclp
Linguistik 2002: Referate des )ffVIII. Korutaraer Slavistischen Arbeitstrffirs Bochum,
I 0.
-
1 2.
9.
2
00
2 (Ser:
Slavistische
Beitr?ige,
Vol. 434).
Munich: Sagner.
Kordi6, SnjeZana.
2007.
La langue
croate,
serbe, bosniaque
et mont€n6grine
[Croatian,
Serbian,
Bosniakian and Montenegrinl
(pp.7la8). Au sud
de l'Est.
Vol.
3.
Kordii, SnjeZana.
2010.
Jezik
i nacionlizam
fLanguage
and Nationolisn]. (Ser:
Rotulus
Un iversitas). Zagr
eb : Durieux.
Kordii, SnjeZana.
2019.
Reakcije
na Deklaraciju o zajednidkom
jeziku [Reactions
to the
Declaration
on
the Common Languagel
(pp.
145-152).
Njegoievi dani.
Vol.
7.
KoZul,
Anja. 2021.
Jeckov razblla mitove
o odvojenim Skolama
u Hrvatskoj
[Jeckov
shat-
tered
myths about separate schools in Croatia].
Nwosti. T Jul.
www.portalnovosti.com/
jeckov-razbila-mitove-o-odvojenim-skolama-u-hrvatskoj.
Accessed:
Oct
4. 2021.
Kraji5nih Dorde.
201E.
Noam
Chomsky
potpisao
Deklaraciju
o zajednidkom
jeziku
lNoam
Chomsky
Has Signed
the Declaration
on
the Common
Languagel.
Oslobodenje.2T
Mar.
178 Snjeiana Kordit
www.oslobodjenje.ba/o2lkultura/noam-chomsky-potpisao-deklaraciju-o-zajednickom-
jeziku-3
5
I
402?fb_comment_id=
I 9
4454103561 5930. Accessed:
Sept
5, 2019.
La5kov4 Lili. 2001.
Sdrbo-hdrvatska
gramatil<n
fSerbo-Croatian
Grammarf.
Sofia:
Emas.
Lista
potpisnika
Deklaracije o zajednidkom
jeziku
[List of Signatories
to the Declaration
on
the Common
LanguageJ.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/l XVGV5Z306SeDFzp
dpUHhfeK-voAFdaakSa
ElqXfGozA/pubhtm
l. Accessed: Oct
5, 2021 .
Mati6, Sredko.
201E.
Serbs
and
Croats
Still Segregated
in Vukovar's
Schools.
Deutsche
Welle.
7 Aug. www.dw.com/erlserbs-and-croats-still-segregated-in-vukovars-schools/a-
44992l23.Accessed:
Sept
2, 2019.
Mclennan,
Sean.
1996.
Sociolinguistic
Analysis
of 'Serbo-Croatian'(pp.
103-109).
Cal-
gary Working
Papers in Linguistrcs.
Vol. 18.
Winter.
Milekii, Sven.
2017.
Post-Yugoslav
'Common
Language'Declaration
Challenges National-
ism.
Ballcan Insight.30 Mar.
www.balkaninsight.com/enlarticlelpost-yugoslav-common-
language-declaration-challenges-nationalism-03-29-2017.
Accessed:
Sept
23.
2019.
Mork, Henning. 2002.
Serbolaoatisk
grammatik:
substantivets
morfologi fSerbo-Croatian
Grammar: Noun Morphologtl. fuhus: Slavisk
Institut,
fuhus Universitet.
Mork, Henning. 2008. Neka
pr4gmatidna
zapaiarga
o postojanju
srpskohrvatskog
jezika
[Some
Pragmatic
Observations on the Existence
of the Serbo-Croatian
LanguageJ
(pp.295a99). In: Branislav Ostojid,
ed,.
Jeziika
situacija
u Crnoj Gori
- norma
i stand-
ardizacija.
Podgorica:
Cmogorska akademija
nauka i umjetnosti.
OSCE
Belgrade Mission Distances ltself from Discussions on the Use of Bosnian
in
SandZak Schools.
2004.
Organizationfor Security
and
Co-operation
in Europe.l5 Nov.
www.osce.org/serbia/
56945. Accessed:
Sept
I 2, 2019.
Pennington,
James Joshua-
2021.'Jinguistics'in Croati4
Past
and Present
(pp. l2l-la\
Balkanistica.Yol. 34.
Pohl, Heinz-Dieter. 1996.
Serbokoatisch
- Rtickblick
und Ausblick [Serbo-Croatian
-
Review and
Outlookl (pp. 205-219).In: Ingeborg Ohnheiser,
ed. Wecluelbeziehungen
zwisclren
slawischen Sprachen, Literaturen
und Kulnren in Vergangenheit
und
Gegen-
wart (Ser: Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Kulturwissenschaff/Slavica
aenipontana
Vol. 4).
Innsbruck:
Verlag
des Instituts frr Sprachwissenschaft.
Potpi5ite ako ste saglasni: Ovo
je Deklaracija
o zajednidkom
jeziku [Sign
if You Agree:
This Is the Declaration
on the
Common Languagel.
2017. Vijesti.
30 Mar.
www.vijesti.
me/vijesti/drustvo/potpisite-ako-ste-saglasni-ovo-je-deklaracija-o-zajednickom-jeziku.
Accessed:
Sept
16, 2019.
Proditajte tekst
Deklaracije o zajednidkom
jeziku [Read
the
Text
of the
Declaration
on the
Common LanguageJ.
2017. Nl. 29 Mar. http://ba-nlinfo.comMjesti/a145740/Tekst-
Deklaracij e-o-zaj ednickom-j eziku. html. Accessed
: Sept 8,
20
19.
Pupavac,
Vanessa-
2006.
Discriminating Language
Rights and Politics
in the Post-Yugoslav
States
(pp. I 12-128). Patterru
of
Prejudice.
Vol. 40,
No. 2.
Rezultati
popisa
stanovniStva
[Census
Results].
2013. Vreme.
ll Dec.
ww\il.vreme.com/
cms/view.php?id=
l 1577 58.
Accessed: Sept
7,
2019.
SDP
predstavio
inicijativu zaimlenu 24 zakona
koja reguli3u obrazovanje
[The
SDP Pre-
sented
an
lnitiative
to Amend
24 Laws Regulating
Education].2017. Klix.ba.27
Nov.
www.klix.balvijestilbih/sdp-predstavio-inicijativu-za-imrjenu-24-zakona-koja-regulisu-
obrazovanje-u-bih/
1 7 1 127
07
4.
Accessed:
Oct
7,
2021 .
Sipta, Danko.
2019.
Lexical
Layers of ldentit.v:
Words,
Meaning, and Culture
in tlu Slavic
Languages. New York: Cambridge
University
Press.
Ideologt Against Lansuage 179
Sito-Sudii,
Daria. 2017.
Bosnian Students Keep Up Their Protest Against Segregated
Schools.
Reuters. 20 Jun.
www.reuters.com/article/us-bosnia-protests-students/bosnian-
students-keep-up-their-protest-against-segregated-schools-idUSKBNl9B26P. Accessed:
Sept
3, 2019.
Sokolovid, Hana 2017.
Srednjo5kolci
iz fBiH i RS ujedinjeni
protiv podjela
[Second-
ary School
Students from fBiH and RS
United Against Divisionsl. N1. 15 Oct. http://
ba.nl
info.comA/ij estila220T63iSrednjoskolci-iz-fBiH-i-RS-ujedinjeni-protiv-podjela.
html. Accessed:
Sept 6,2019.
SrednjoSkolci
iz Jajca u borbi
protiv
segregacije
dobili
nagradu
OSCE-a
[Secondary
School
Students from Jajce in Their Fight Against
Segregation
Received
the OSCE
Awardl.
2018.
Taino.net. l7 Nov. www.tacno.neVnasigradovi/srednjoskolci-iz-jajca-u-borbi-pro
tiv-segregacije-dobili-nagradu-osce-a/.
Accessed:
Sept
24, 2019.
Surk, Barbara.
2018.
In a Divided
Bosni4 Segregated Schools Persist. The
New York Times.
I Dec. www.nytimes.com/20l8ll2l0llwodd/europe/bosnia-schools-segregated-ethnic.
html. Accessed:
Sept
24,2019.
Thomas, Paul-Louis.2003. Le serbo-croate
(bosniaque,
croate, montdndgrin,
serbe):
de
l'6tude
d'une langue e I'identitd
des
langues
[Serbo-Croat
(Bosnian,
Croatian, Monte-
negrin, Serbian): From the
Study
of a Language
to the
Identity of Languagesl
(pp.
31 l-
325). Revue des dtades
slwes.Yol.74, No. 2-3.
Tripunovski, Stiven.
2017.
Gemeinsamkeit
wider
Willen?
Sprache
im siidslawischen
Raum
[Commonality
Against
the
Will? Language in the
South Slavic
Area]
(pp.
30-31). In:
Heiner
Grunert
and Florian
Kiihrer-Wielach, eds.
Greraen
im Fluss. Regensburgl:
Schnell
et
Steiner.
Trudgill,
Peter. 2017.
Time
to Make
Four
Into One
(p. 46).
The New
European. 30 Nov.
https://archive.org/details/PeterTrudgillTimeToMakeFourlntoOne20lT.
Accessed: Sept
7,2019.
Ustav
Republike Hrvatske
[Constitution
of the
Republic
of Croatia] .2019. Zakon.2l Sept.
www.
zakon .tv
I
zJ
9 N stav-Republike-Hrvatske.
Accessed
: Sept
22, 20
19
.
A Vision of Unity: Jajce's Student Movement
for Inclusive Multi-Ethnic Education.
2018.
Organization
for Security
and Co-operation in Europe.2 Nov. wwwosce.org/
hcnm/401897. Accessed:
Sept
10,
2019.
Vudi6, Nikola. 2018. Noam
Chomsky
potpisao
Deklaraciju
o zajednidkom
jeziku lNoarn
Chomsky Has Signed the Declaration
on the Common Languagel.
lf/. 27 Mu. http:ll
ba.nlinfo.comla2,509l0/Vijesti/VijestiA'lloam-Chomsky-potpisao-Deklaraciju-o-zajed
nickom-jeziku.html.
Accessed:
Sept
23,
2019.
Zanelli,Aldo.
2018.
Eine Analyse der Metaphern in der
koatischen Linguistikfachzeitschrift
'Jezik'von
l99l bis 1997
[An
Analysis
of Metaphors in the
Croatian Linguistic Journal
'Iezlk'from l99l to 19971(Ser:
Studien
zur
Slavistik,
Vol.
4l). Hamburg:
Dr.
Kovad.
LANGUAGES
AND
NATItlNALISM
INSTEAD
tlF
EMPIRES
Motoki
Nom".;l::t* asz
Kamuselta
First published
2024
by Routledge
4 Pat( Squre, Milton Padq Abingdon, Oxon OXl4 4RN
and
by Routledge
605
ThirdAvenue, New
Yorlq l'tY 10158
Routledge
is an imprint of tlu Tcylor & Frouis Group,
an i4fornu busircss
@2024
selection
and editorial
md€r, MotokiNomachi andTomasz
Kamusell4, individual chapters, the confributors
The right of Motoki Nomachi
and
Tomasz Kalusella to be
identified
as
the arttnrs ofthe editorial
material,
and
of the alhon for ttpir indivienl
chapters, has
been
asserted
in accordancc with sectio'ns 77 nd 78 ofthe
Copynghq
Desigls and
Pden6 Act 1988.
Atl righb reserved.
No pat ofthis book may be
reprinted
or reproduced
or
utilised in my form or by any
electonic, mechanical,
o'r other ttler4s, now
lmwn or hereafter invene4 including
photocopying
and reording or in
any
informdion storage
q retrieval
systcrn,
witronrt
permission
in writing
from flre
publishers.
Tradenokrctice: hoduct or corporafie
nanrcs may
be
tadeinarls or
registered tad€,mtr|$, ad are
used
only for identificdion and explmation
withotrt intent to infringe-
British Libruy Cataloguing-in-Publicatiot
Dau
A cdalogue
record for this book is available
from the
British Library
ISBN: 97 8-0-367
471
9 1-0
Obk)
ISBN: 97 V1432-5599&E (pbk)
ISBN: 97& I -003-03a02-5
(ebk)
DOI: 10.4324 1978
I 003 034025
Typeset
in Tfunes New Roman
byApex CoVantage,
LLC
