Article published in:
Language Problems and Language Planning
Vol. 38:3 (2014) ► pp. 292–303

Interlinguistics and Esperanto studies at universities

The experience at the University of Turin

| University of Amsterdam/Turin
After 2010, following the Bologna process and the so-called ‘Gelmini reform’, universities in Italy were subjected to deep changes in administration, in research and education. The course in ‘Language Planning and Planned Languages’ was established in 2011–2012, under the initiative of the Istituto Italiano d’Esperanto and with the financial support of the Esperantic Studies Foundation, as a follow-up of the course in ‘Interlinguistics and Esperantic Studies’ offered by Prof. Emeritus Fabrizio A. Pennacchietti in the preceeding 15 years. This article reports on the structure, content and results of the course in its first three academic years, with a special attention to the methodological innovations in language teaching which were utilized in the class, and which might be useful for similar initiatives in other universities in Europe and abroad.
Keywords: planned languages, Esperanto, interlinguistics, Esperantic Studies, Italy, methodology, the Bologna process, language teaching, higher education
Published online: 22 December 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.38.3.04gob
Bibliography

Bibliography

Adams, M.
(Ed.) (2011) From Elvish to Klingon: Exploring invented languages. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Blanke, D.
(2003) Interlinguistics and Esperanto studies: Paths to the scholarly literature. Language Problems and Language Planning, 27(2), 155–192. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1989) Planned languages: A survey of some of the main problems. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages (pp. 63–87) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(1985) Internationale Plansprachen. Eine Einfürung. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Bonfiglio, T.
(2013) Inventing the native speaker. Critical Multilinguism Studies, 1(2), 29–58.Google Scholar
(2010) Mother tongues and nations: The invention of the native speaker. Berlin: De Grutyer Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Canagarajah, S.
(2013) Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carlevaro, T.
(1984) Ric Berger (1894-1984). Planlingvistiko, 12(3), 4.Google Scholar
Cheyne, R.
(2008) Created languages in science fiction. Science Fiction Studies, 3(3), 386–403Google Scholar
Cooper, R.
(1989) Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corsetti, R.
(1995) A mother tongue spoken mainly by fathers. Language Problems and Language Planning, 20(3), 263–273. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dell’Aquila, V., & Iannàcaro, G.
(2004) La pianificazione linguistica: Lingue, società e istituzioni. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Eco, U.
(1993) La ricerca della lingua perfetta nella cultura europea. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Fiedler, S.
(2008) Interlinguistics and Esperanto studies: Experience at the University of Leipzig. Language Problems and Language Planning, 32(3), 269–279 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fishman, J.
(1991) Reversing language shift: Theory and practice of assistance to threatened languages. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2006) Do not leave your language alone: The hidden status agendas within corpus planning in language policy. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gobbo, F.
(2008) Planning languages and language planning: The contribution of interlinguistics to cross-cultural communication. In F. Boers, J. Darquennes, K. Kerremans, & R. Temmerman (Eds.), Multilingualism and applied comparative linguistics, vol. 2 (pp. 24–60). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
(2005) The digital way to spread conlangs. In S. Posteguillo, M. Valor, L. Gea, R. Renau, M. Luisa, M. Esteve, & S. Insa (Eds.) Language at work:Llanguage learning, discourse and translation studies in Internet (pp. 45–53). Castellon: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
(1998) Dirlo in Europanto. Italiano & Oltre, 5, 226–231.Google Scholar
Grossblatt, B., & Fine, A.
(2013) How to speak Klingon: Essential phrases for the intergalactic traveler (Star Trek).Google Scholar
Hornberger, N.
(2006) Frameworks and models in language policy and planning. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 24–41). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kazimierczak, K.
(2010) Adapting Shakespeare for ‘Star Trek’ and ‘Star Trek’ for Shakespeare: ‘The Klingon Hamlet’ and the spaces of translation. Studies in Popular Culture, 32(2), 35–55.Google Scholar
Kloss, H.
(1967) Abstand languages and Ausbau languages. Anthropological Linguistics, 9(7), 29–41.Google Scholar
Kachru, B.
(1992) The other tongue: English across cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Krachru, B.
(1985) Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the language and the literature (pp. 11–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Large, A.
(1985) The artificial language movement. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lindstedt, J.
(2010) Esperanto as a family language. In F. Dervin (Ed.), Lingua francas: La véhicularité linguistique pour vivre, travailler et étudier (pp. 69–80). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Lins, U.
(2002) Esperanto: The New Latin for the Church and for Ecumenism. Antwerpen: Flandra Esperanto-Ligo.Google Scholar
Nicholas, N. & Strader, A.
(2000) The Klingon Hamlet. New York: Pocket Books. Original publication 1996.Google Scholar
Okrand, M.
(1985) The Klingon dictionary (Star Trek). New York: Simon & Shuster.Google Scholar
Okrand, M., Adams, M., Hendriks-Hermans, J., & Kroon, S.
(2011) ‘Wild and Whirling Words’: The invention and use of Klingon. In M. Adams (Ed.), From Elvish to Klingon: Exploring invented languages (pp. 111–134). Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Pennacchietti, F.
(2014) Inizio dell’insegnamento di Interlinguistica ed Esperantologia a Torino. Personal communication via e-mail 22 May.Google Scholar
Phillipson, R.
(1991) Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, K.
(1989) Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seidlhofer, B.
(2011) Understanding English as a lingua franca. A complete introduction to the theoretical nature and practical implications of English used as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sherwood, B., & Cheng, Chin-Chuan
(1980) A linguistic course on international communication and constructed languages. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 10, 1.Google Scholar
Street, B.
(1993) Culture is a verb: Anthropological aspects of language and cultural processes. In D. Graddol, L. Thompson, & M. Byram (Eds). Language and culture (pp. 23–43). Clevendon.Google Scholar
Sutton, G.
(2008) Concise encylopedia of the original literature of Esperanto. New York: Mondial.Google Scholar
Van Parijs, P.
(2011) Linguistic justice for Europe and for the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wahlgren, Y.
(2004) Klingon as linguistic capital: A sociologic study of nineteen advanced Klingonists. Bachelor’s thesis. Lund University.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Gobbo, Federico
2017. Are planned languages less complex than natural languages?. Language Sciences 60 ► pp. 36 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 05 february 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.