Framework for the description of varieties of pluricentric languages
Name of author supplying the data:
A. Name of the pluricentric language the variety belongs to: Albanian
B. The name(s) of the variety: Macedonian Albanian, Macedonia Albanian, FYROM Albanian, Shqipja (standarde) e Maqedonisë, Shqipja standarde në Maqedoni, Gjuha shqipe në Maqedoni
C. General Features:
0. Non-dominant variety
1. Albania (Albanian Albanian), Macedonia (Macedonian Albanian), Montenegro (border areas)
4. Use of the variety: written and spoken
5. Writing system/alphabet of the variety: shared with other varieties
6. Latin alphabet
7. Full mutual intelligibility with other Standard Albanian varieties and mostly intelligible with both Gheg and Tosk dialects
8. Linguistic fragmentation: Standard Albanian is based on a Tosk variety, whereas the Albanian-speaking areas in the northwestern Republic of Macedonia are completely included in the Gheg area. The Gheg variety has no standardised form and is only a spoken variety.
D. Standardisation / Codification:
9. Corpora: Are there electronic text corpora of the ndv-variety?
10. The linguistic/pragmatic features of the variety have been: 1. well studied / 2. little studied / 3. not studied until now
11. Pronunciation: Are there scientific studies and publications about the specific (1) phonetic / (2) phonological features of the nd-variety / (3) pronunciation dictionary(ies)
12. Lexicon: Are there dictionary(ies) of the variety documenting the lexicon? (Spelling-dict, learners dict., universal dict., thesaurus, etc.)
13. Grammar: Are there studies on morphology and syntax of the nd-variety? / Are there complete grammars of the variety?
14. Pragmatics: Are there scientific studies on the pragmatics of the nd-variety?
E. Awareness / Function for identity:
15. Awareness: Is there linguistic awareness in the speaker-community of the features of the nd-variety?
16. Linguistic Identity: Are the linguistic features part of the individual, social and national identity?
17. Language loyalty: Are speakers of the nd-variety loyal to their variety by avoiding the features of the dominating variety(ies)?
18. Are the elites of the community loyal to the variety or showing a tendency to prefer the features of the dominating variety(ies)?
19. Language development / shift: How strong is the linguistic contact between the non-dominating and dominating variety?
20. Is there a shift towards the dominating variety or away from it?
F. Language Policy:
21. Is there an explicit/implicit language policy concerning the codification, status- and corpus-planning of the nd-variety?
22. Are there specific measures and institutions for the codification of the nd-variety?
23. Is there a co-operation between the norm-setting (codifying) institutions of the d-variety(ies) and the nd-variety?
24. Does the nd-variety have any impact on the norm(s) of the pluricentric language?
25. How is the variety dealt with in education? Is there an emphasis on the linguistic features of the nd-variety or on the dominant variety in primary and secondary education?
26. How are publishing houses dealing with the linguistic features of the nd-variety in literary works? Are they corrected?
G. Overall decription of the language situation of the pluricentric language in general and the specific variety in particular:
H. Relevant Literature