2 Summary

Building upon the foundational themes outlined in the introduction, the first part of the handbook establishes critical theoretical distinctions that underpin the subsequent chapters – Part I ‘Theoretical and methodological issues’ (pp. 1–155). This foundation is followed by a detailed discussion of various methodological approaches for investigating prescriptivism, including experimental methods, historical database analyses and corpus-based techniques.

Part I opens with Geoffrey K. Pullum’s ‘Why grammars have to be normative – and prescriptivists have to be scientific’, where he differentiates ‘normative’ from ‘prescriptive’ approaches, arguing that no descriptive text is wholly free from normative influence. Pullum contends that the descriptive–prescriptive divide requires a rigorous, evidence-based approach in practice. In ‘Verbal hygiene’, Deborah Cameron revisits the concept, which she originally introduced in the 1990s. Initially defined as ‘a diverse set of activities linked by the idea that some ways of using language are functionally, aesthetically, or morally preferable to others’ (Cameron Reference Cameron1994: 383), ‘verbal hygiene’ has since been conflated with prescriptivism, acquiring negative connotations. She repositions it as a potentially progressive force rather than an inherently conservative one.

The following chapters shift focus towards methodological applications of prescriptivism, examining accent bias, historiographical research and corpus-based studies. ‘Accent bias’ by Dominic Watt, Erez Levon and Christian Ilbury explores accent discrimination, presenting an experimental case study to illustrate the measurable impact of accent bias. ‘Historiographical methods’ by Nuria Yáñez-Bouza demonstrates how historical grammars can be leveraged for prescriptivist research, offering a practical approach for linguistic historians. In ‘Corpus-based approaches to prescriptivism’, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi and Dieuwertje Bloemen analyse how prescriptive attitudes influence language change, but they risk oversimplifying prescriptivist motivations by treating them as having a monolithic drive to improve language, overlooking prescriptivism’s role as a potential tool for social exclusion – a theme explored elsewhere in the handbook. Nonetheless, the chapter raises compelling questions about prescriptivism’s subtle role in language change (see Moschonas Reference Moschonas, Lavidas and Nikiforidou2022; Malory Reference Malory2024), an area that could have been more thoroughly explored across the volume.

The next chapters examine how prescriptivism develops within different linguistic varieties and socio-political contexts. Pam Peters, in ‘Prescription and normativity in the evolution of inner-circle Englishes’, studies how World Englishes like Australian and Canadian English establish local norms, showing that institutional codification subtly reinforces prescriptive practices. Edgar W. Schneider’s ‘The role of prescriptivism in the emergence of New Englishes’ shifts to postcolonial settings, investigating how prescriptive attitudes shape new English varieties. Schneider addresses crucial issues, including power dynamics, educational influences and grassroots prescriptivism. Schneider poignantly underscores a recurring theme throughout the handbook: ‘To put it pointedly: A prescriptive attitude serves a society’s upper strata; the poor cannot afford it’ (p. 117), emphasising the socio-economic dimensions of prescriptivism.

This part closes by expanding the cross-linguistic perspective, beginning with ‘Prescriptivism and national identity: Sociohistorical constructionism, disciplinary blindspots, and Standard Austrian German’ by Stefan Dollinger. Dollinger critiques the criteria that distinguish a language from a dialect, using Austrian German as a case study to highlight the influence of dehegemonisation and decolonisation on prescriptive studies. ‘Standards with pluricentric languages: Who sets norms and where?’, by Raymond Hickey, continues this analysis, focusing on pluricentricity in languages like English and Spanish. Hickey explores the dynamic processes of norm formation and prestige, stressing the importance of regional language hubs – including Mexico, Argentina, Canada and others – in shaping prescriptive standards.

The second part of the volume delves into the social dynamics and practical applications of prescriptivism, examining both its hierarchical enforcement and its capacity to emerge from grassroots movements – Part II ‘Contexts and practices of prescriptivism’ (pp. 157–283). While prescriptive practices often reflect established social values and hierarchies, they can also challenge traditional power structures through public discourse. By disentangling common prescriptive practices, this part reveals the nuanced ways in which prescriptivism enforces social norms yet remains open to negotiation from below.

In ‘Usage guides as a text type’, Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade examines the mix of prescription, proscription and description in usage guides. She challenges the notion that a shift toward descriptivism would lead usage guides to abandon prescriptive functions, showing instead their continued ideological tension. Elizabeth Peterson and Marika Hall’s ‘English prescriptivism in higher education settings: Focus on Nordic countries’ explores prescriptivism in the Nordic context, where the rise of English through cultural imperialism, not colonisation, has led to adherence to British norms. They argue that elite language practices in academia enforce a prescriptivist, exonormative standard.

The next two chapters provide focused examinations of how prescriptivism serves as a vehicle for social discrimination. In ‘Prescriptivism in education: From language ideologies to listening practices’, Ian Cushing and Julia Snell explore the deep-seated influence of prescriptivism in the English education system, linking it to class- and race-based structures embedded over the past 150 years. Likewise, in ‘Linguistic prescriptivism as social prescription: The case of gender’, Evan D. Bradley addresses the language surrounding transgender and nonbinary individuals, particularly neopronouns and singular they. Bradley argues that ‘prejudicial prescriptivism is not primarily about language, but about social prejudices, and should be evaluated as such’ (p. 223), reflecting how acceptance of certain pronouns aligns with broader social values. Together, these chapters reveal prescriptivism as a proxy for social oppression, where linguistic debates – often detached from descriptive accuracy – serve to reinforce hierarchical power dynamics by legitimising contentious social views.

Many of the preceding chapters establish that linguistic prescriptivism often reinforces social hierarchies. However, the handbook later illustrates how prescriptivism can also be driven by grassroots, bottom-up dynamics. In ‘Grassroots prescriptivism’, Morana Lukač and Theresa Heyd explore how digital communities engage in evidently lively debates over linguistic usage, negotiating offline pronunciation norms and how these community-led prescriptive practices mirror traditional prescriptivism in how linguistic capital is contested and negotiated. ‘Prescription and taboo: Australia’s sensitivity towards American influence’, by Kate Burridge, continues the examination of grassroots prescriptivism, focusing on Australian resistance to Americanisms. Burridge demonstrates that ritual, solidarity and control shape these attitudes, which can be interpreted as a form of covert prestige. ‘Copy editors, (not) all alike’, by Morana Lukač and Adrian Stenton, shifts the perspective to professional editorial norms. Through a case study on the singular data, they find that clarity and consistency – rather than social bias – guide editorial decisions, challenging the assumption that prescriptivism in editing serves social ideologies across the board.

Part III ‘Prescriptivism across languages and cultures’ (pp. 285–463) examines prescriptivism’s global manifestations, with the editors aiming to broaden the field in response to rising decolonial approaches in sociolinguistics. However, despite this ambition, over half the chapters focus on European languages and contexts, often filtered through Eurocentric theories – a missed opportunity to fully realise the decolonial framework. Nonetheless, each chapter offers a distinct socio-political and historical perspective, revealing how prescriptivism operates in unique but interconnected ways across various linguistic landscapes.

This part examines prescriptivism’s complex role in shaping linguistic identities in regions marked by significant language revival or ideological divides. In ‘Standard language ideology and prescriptivism in the Arabic-speaking world’, Andreas Hallberg explores Arabic’s diglossia and early standardisation, leading to a notable divide between formal and colloquial varieties. ‘Prescriptive language ideologies in Modern Hebrew’, by Roey J. Gafter and Uri Mor, investigates Hebrew’s revival, illustrating how prescriptivism reinforces national identity while negotiating between conventional and imposed norms. Finally, ‘A socio-political and historical perspective of linguistic prescriptivism in relation to the African languages of Southern Africa’, by Russell H. Kaschula, Sebolelo Mokapela, Dion Nkomo and Bulelwa Nosilela, traces prescriptivism from pre-colonial times to today. The authors argue that multilingualism and linguistic diversity are compatible with prescriptive frameworks and suggest that adopting these models could improve social outcomes in South Africa.

The following chapters explore prescriptivism’s varied manifestations across Asia and the Slavic regions. In ‘Prescriptivism in Greater China: Historical trajectories and contemporary pluricentricity’, Henning Klöter analyses the complex political and historical influences shaping linguistic standards in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, Macao, Singapore and Taiwan, noting distinct realisations of prescriptivism in each area. ‘Prescriptivism and the English language in Southeast Asia’ by Lionel Wee and Nora Samosir takes a regional approach, using multiple frameworks to demonstrate the diverse ways prescriptivism operates in Southeast Asia. Shifting to a Slavic context, Arto Mustajoki’s ‘Literary norms in Russia: Past and present’ traces Russian prescriptive norms, especially in literary Russian (literaturnyj jazyk), and their monocentric focus. Lastly, ‘Prescriptivism in Croatia’ by Anđel Starčević, Mate Kapović and Daliborka Sarić examines prescriptive ideologies centred on concepts like monoglossia and monostylia, revealing an underlying assumption that only one ‘correct’ form is necessary, which heavily influences Croatian prescriptive practices.

The final chapters delve into prescriptivism within Western European languages. In ‘Standardization, prescriptivism and diglossia: How acceptable is normalized Breton to native speakers?’, Gary D. Manchec German provides a sociolinguistic history of Breton dialects, highlighting the divide between traditional speakers and adherents to the ‘new Breton secular standard’ (NBSS). This tension raises concerns about whether ‘language revival’ may sometimes lead to language replacement. ‘Metaphor as a manifestation of prescriptivism: The case of France and Quebec’ by Olivia Walsh and Emma Humphries explores French prescriptivism in both France and Quebec, where language is metaphorically framed as healthy or ill to justify prescriptive norms, reflecting long-standing social imbalances. Finally, ‘Dutch prescriptivism in a historical-sociolinguistic perspective’ by Eline Lismont, Gijsbert Rutten and Rik Vosters analyses Dutch prescriptivism’s institutionalisation over time, noting that linguistic features often predated their codification, reshaping perspectives on prescriptivism’s role in language change.

3 Evaluation

In the ‘Afterword’ (pp. 464–72), David Crystal highlights the importance of a volume like this for a burgeoning subfield. It marks a significant milestone for prescriptivist studies, which remains in its early stages of development. A symptom of this, however, is that the field is only now beginning to define itself, with far fewer established frameworks compared to older subfields like historical linguistics. As a result, it is not – and could not yet be – an entirely developed discipline with standardised methodologies or comprehensive theories.

This emerging nature leads to a degree of theoretical and structural fragmentation. While chapters frequently return to defining prescriptivism, each author’s unique interpretation introduces a sense of conceptual variation. Structurally, some chapters feel misaligned with their assigned parts, occasionally diverting from the expected thematic flow. However, what the collection lacks in cohesion, it compensates for by illustrating the field’s significance. Through diverse case studies and methodologies, the volume emphasises the importance of continued research, highlighting prescriptivism’s role within linguistics’ future.

With this in mind, the largest gap in the volume, as mentioned, is its limited focus on languages that are both outside Europe and minority languages. Considering the volume’s aims to be diverse and highlight the importance of prescriptivism studies, research on prescriptivism’s role in language revival – rather than only in post-revival contexts like Modern Hebrew – seems like an obvious inclusion. There is substantial work in this area, covering less-discussed linguistic domains such as Indigenous languages of Australia (Couzens et al. Reference Couzens, Gaby, Stebbins and Allan2020), North America (Kickham Reference Kickham2015) and South America (Kohlberger Reference Kohlberger2016), or other forms of minority language contexts such as creoles (Winer Reference Winer, Percy and Davidson2012) or sign languages (Snoddon & De Meulder Reference Snoddon and De Meulder2020). These studies illustrate the critical impact of prescriptivism on language revitalisation, emphasising how nuanced understandings can either support or hinder revival projects within these communities. A handbook of this nature could have served as an ideal platform for these perspectives.

In light of these considerations, I do not anticipate this volume will be commonly read in its entirety. However, linguists and scholars with an interest in language will find significant intellectual value in select chapters. So, I outline several chapters that, in my view, offer particularly valuable insights for diverse scholarly purposes.

Firstly, this book is likely to attract established linguists, including those not directly involved in prescriptivism research. For updating one’s knowledge of the field’s current theoretical foundations, the chapters by Geoffrey K. Pullum (chapter 1) and Deborah Cameron (chapter 2) provide essential starting points. Pullum offers an in-depth exploration of prescriptivism’s meaning, especially in relation to descriptivism, while Cameron delivers a comprehensive update on the field overall. For a more critical lens, Stefan Dollinger’s discussion on prescriptivism and national identity (chapter 8) encourages linguists to reflect on the frameworks that shape their own research. In addition, the chapters addressing bottom-up prescriptive practices (chapters 13–15) challenge conventional notions by exploring how prescriptivism can emerge from grassroots dynamics. Aligning with the editors’ aim to incorporate decolonial approaches, the discussions on African languages in Southern Africa (chapter 19) and on Breton in France (chapter 24) offer fresh perspectives on how prescriptivism affects minority languages.

To further underscore the handbook’s value in expanding understanding of the descriptivism–prescriptivism dichotomy, this volume is also highly suitable for undergraduate students. The chapter on accent bias by Dominic Watt, Erez Levon and Christian Ilbury (chapter 3) is an excellent introduction, combining theoretical insights, methodologies and accessible results on a relatable topic. Similarly, Ian Cushing and Julia Snell’s examination of prescriptivism in education (chapter 12) holds interdisciplinary appeal, providing an ideal entry point for linguists and scholars from other fields interested in exploring language-related issues.

Overall, the strongest emerging themes are how broader social ideologies manifest through language ideologies, while simultaneously demonstrating that one can recognise the benefits of prescribed forms of language without marginalising non-standard varieties. This volume successfully highlights that prescriptivism is more than simply a linguistic phenomenon; it is intricately tied to societal power structures, culture and identity. Ultimately, The Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Prescriptivism marks a significant milestone in the study of prescriptivism, presenting the field not just as a developing subfield, but as one deserving rigorous scholarly attention. As this handbook shows, the prescriptivism most of us are familiar with is only the surface of a deeper and more complex phenomenon. In the years to come, I anticipate that this volume will serve as a cornerstone for the evolving discourse on linguistic prescriptivism.