Abstract A predominant ideological tendency in the Manx language movement positions contemporary revival speakers as legitimate successors of historical native speakers, with linguistic innovations framed as naturalized language change. Simultaneously, strongly purist stances have seen the borrowing of numerous lexical items from the closely related Gaelic languages, at the expense of established English loanwords. A countervailing stance has gained ground more recently, prompted by the greater availability of digitized historical texts and recordings. This “authenticist” stance seeks greater adherence to linguistic norms which were prevalent among native speakers, as well as greater acceptance of English loanwords. This article analyses data from sociolinguistic interviews as well as pedagogical materials to examine the motivations and implications of these ideological shifts, and the extent to which they challenge or confirm generalizations about “new speaker” varieties. Related issues of gender, counterelites, the role of language “experts”, and the language ideologies of teachers are also considered. The present analysis problematizes scholarly contentions that so-called “essentialist” ideologies are necessarily oppressive, reactionary, or likely to be eclipsed within revitalization contexts. In fact, authenticist stances may themselves reflect contemporary shifts towards demotization, resulting in revalorization of the hybridity of the historical language, as well as representing an assertion of Manx identity. Pragmatic motivations are also apparent, reflecting a desire for clearer linguistic models than provided by the perceived heterogeneity of revival usage.
Christopher Lewin (Thu,) studied this question.