SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkbilig / 2025 / Cilt: 2025 Sayı: 49

‘Let’s publish this article’: Language Ideologies in the Context of Plaza Variety

“BU ÇALIŞMAYI ‘PUBLISH’ EDELİM”: PLAZA DEĞİŞKESİ BAĞLAMINDA GERÇEKLEŞEN DİL İDEOLOJİLERİ

Emre Yağlı(HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-1044-9018
Journal
Türkbilig
Pages
1–27
Publication Date
2025-06-26
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Moreover, the study has identified that language ideologies differ based on individuals’ varying interests, concerns, and levels of awareness.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The plaza variety, also known as “plaza language” and “plaza speech” in social contexts, is a speech style that has emerged as a result of the neoliberal policies implemented in Turkey since the 1990s.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This style is commonly observed among individuals working in multinational companies engaged in global trade in major cities and has gained significant attention in recent years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Moreover, the study has identified that language ideologies differ based on individuals’ varying interests, concerns, and levels of awareness.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Plaza değişkesi · dil ideolojisi · Dil Devrimi

Abstract

The plaza variety, also known as “plaza language” and “plaza speech” in social contexts, is a speech style that has emerged as a result of the neoliberal policies implemented in Turkey since the 1990s. This style is commonly observed among individuals working in multinational companies engaged in global trade in major cities and has gained significant attention in recent years. This increased visibility has led to various opinions and assessments of this speech style. Therefore, this study aims to analyse individuals’ perceptions of the plaza variety through the concept of language ideology and to clarify the language ideologies associated with this speech style. The study focuses on the assessments made by individuals on Ekşi Sözlük regarding the plaza variety, examining these assessments from a socio-semiotic perspective and explaining the development of the emerging language ideologies. The main finding of the study is that the language ideologies related to the plaza variety are closely linked to the language and educational reforms of the early Republican period. Moreover, the study has identified that language ideologies differ based on individuals’ varying interests, concerns, and levels of awareness.

Özet

Toplumsal alanda “plaza dili” ya da “plaza konuşması” kavramları ile ifade edilen plaza değişkesi, Türkiye’de 1990’lardan bu yana benimsenen neoliberal politikaların bir sonucu olarak ortaya çıkan bir konuşma biçemidir. Büyük şehirlerde bulunan ve ulus aşırı ticaretle ilgilenen çok uluslu şirketlerde çalışan bireylerce sergilenen bu konuşma biçemi, son yıllarda yoğun biçimde görünürlük kazanmıştır. Plaza değişkesinin sahip olduğu bu görünürlük, bu değişkeye yönelik çeşitli görüşleri ve değerlendirmeleri beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu çalışma, bireylerin plaza değişkesine yönelik sunduğu değerlendirmeleri dil ideolojisi kavramıyla ele almakta ve plaza değişkesine yönelik sergilenen dil ideolojilerine açıklama getirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu çerçevede çalışma, Ekşi Sözlük’te bireylerin plaza değişkesine yönelik yaptığı değerlendirmelere odaklanmakta, bu değerlendirmeleri toplumsal-göstergesel açıdan incelemekte ve ortaya çıkan dil ideolojilerinin oluşumuna açıklama getirmektedir. Çalışmanın en temel bulgusu, plaza değişkesi bağlamında ortaya çıkan dil ideolojilerinin, erken Cumhuriyet döneminde dil ve eğitim alanlarında gerçekleştirilen yenilik hareketleriyle içsel bir bağlantıya sahip olduğudur. Bununla birlikte çalışma, dil ideolojilerinin bireylerin farklı ilgileri, çıkarları ve farkındalık düzeyleri çerçevesinde çeşitlilik gösterdiğini bulgulamıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yağlı, E. (2025). ‘Let’s publish this article’: Language Ideologies in the Context of Plaza Variety. Türkbilig, Cilt: 2025 Sayı: 49, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.59257/turkbilig.1528199

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (74)

  1. Aytürk, İ. (2008). The first episode of Language Reform in Republican Turkey: The Language Council from 1926 to 1931. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 18(3), 275-293. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186308008511
  2. Bamberg, M., De Fina, A., ve Schiffrin, D. (2011). Discourse and identity construction. S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, ve V. L. Vignoles (Yay. haz.), Handbook of identity theory and research içinde (ss. 177-199). Springer.
  3. Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge University Press.
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Çev.). Cambridge University Press.
  5. Bucholtz, M., ve Hall, K. (2004). Language and identity. A. Duranti (Yay. haz.), A companion to linguistic anthropology içinde (ss. 369-394). Blackwell.
  6. Bucholtz, M., ve Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4-5), 585-614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054407
  7. Cannadine, D. (1998). Class in Britain. Palgrave.
  8. Cavanaugh, J. R. (2020). Language ideology revisited. International Journal of Sociology of Language, 263, 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2020-2082
  9. Cüceloğlu, D., ve Slobin, D. (1980). Effects of Turkish Language Reform on person perception. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 11(3), 297-326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022180113005
  10. Çavuşoğlu, Ç. (2019). Standard language ideologies: the case of Cypriot Turkish in Turkish schools in London. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 42(9), 811–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2019.1687711
  11. Çokol, E. (2020). Kuşak çatışmaları ekseninde Z kuşağının dili. International Journal of Language Education and Teaching, 8(2), 404-419. https://doi.org/10.29228/ijlet.43454
  12. Çolak, Y. (2004). Language policy and official ideology in early Republican Turkey. Middle Eastern Studies, 40(6), 67-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/0026320042000282883
  13. Dam, L. (2015). The functionality of personal pronouns in constructions of communities. Globe: A Journal of Language, Culture and Communication, 1, 31-42. https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.globe.v1i0.715
  14. Doğançay-Aktuna, S. (1995). An evaluation of the Turkish Language Reform after 60 years. Language Problems and Language Planning, 19(3), 221-249. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.19.3.01dog
  15. Doğançay-Aktuna, S. (2004). Language planning in Turkey: Yesterday and today. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2004(165), 5-32. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2004.008
  16. Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12, 453-476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2008.00374.x
  17. Erdilek, A. (2008). Internationalization of Turkish MNEs. Journal of Management Development, 27, 744-760. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710810883634
  18. Erdoğan-Öztürk, Y., ve Sağın-Şimşek, Ç. (2023). Language ideologies and stancetaking in refugee identity negotiations: exploring multilingual refugees’ narratives of language use in Turkey. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2023.2216662
  19. Erdoğan-Öztürk, Y. (2024). Exploring the intersections of language ideologies and affect: The case of multilingual ‘returnee’ women in Turkey. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12,(1), 2024, 117-142. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2023-0050
  20. Errington, J. (1998). Shifting languages: Interaction and identity in Javanese Indonesian. Cambridge University Press.
  21. Errington, J. (2000). Indonesian(’s) authority. P. V. Kroskrity (Yay. haz.), Regimes of language içinde (ss. 205-227). School of American Research Press.
  22. Emlak Ansiklopedisi (t.y.). Plaza nedir? 15 Ocak 2024 tarihinde http://emlakansiklopedisi.com/wiki/plaza-nedir adresinden erişildi.
  23. Gal, S. (1992). Multiplicity and contention among ideologies. Pragmatics, 2(3), 445-450. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.2.3.08gal
  24. Gal, S. (1993). Diversity and contestation in linguistic ideologies: German speakers in Hungary. Language in Society, 22(3), 337-359. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017279
  25. Gal, S. (2006). Migration, minorities and multilingualism: Language ideologies in Europe. C. Mar-Molinero ve P. Stevenson (Yay. haz.), Language ideologies, policies and practices – Language and globalization içinde (ss. 13-27). Springer.
  26. Gürsoy Ulusoy, Ş. (2018). Mekansız zamanlar zamansız mekanlar arasındaki plaza çalışanı beyaz yaka’lar. Uluslararası Bilimsel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(1), 241-261. https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.381779
  27. Hakkoymaz, S., ve Uygun, N. (2022). Akademik personelin plaza dilini kullanım durumunun incelenmesi: Küreselleşmenin dile yansıması. Başkent Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 217-224.
  28. Hanson, V. D. (2010, 13 Ağustos). Obama: Figthing the yuppie factor. National Review. https://www.nationalreview.com/2010/08/obama-fighting-yuppie-factor-victor-davis-hanson/
  29. Harwood, N. (2007). Political scientists on the functions of personal pronouns in their writing: An interview-based study of ‘I’ and ‘we’. Text & Talk, 27(1), 27-54. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2007.002
  30. Hill, J. H. (1998) “Today there is no respect”: Nostalgia, “respect,” and oppositional discourse in Mexicano (Nahuatl) language ideology. B. B. Schieffelin, K. A. Woolard, ve P. V. Kroskrity (Yay. haz.), Language ideologies içinde (ss. 68-86). Oxford University Press.
  31. Iñigo-Mora, I. (2004). On the use of personal pronoun ‘we’ in communities. Journal of Language and Politics, 3(1), 27-52. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.3.1.05ini
  32. Irvine, J. T. (1989). When talk isn’t cheap: Language and political economy. American Ethnologist, 16, 248-267. https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.1989.16.2.02a00040
  33. Irvine, J. T., ve Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. P. V. Kroskrity (Yay. haz.), Regimes of language içinde (ss. 35-83). School of American Research Press.
  34. Jaffe, A. (1999). Ideologies in action: Language politics on Corsica. Mouton de Gruyter.
  35. Kana, F., Yağmıur, Y., ve Elkıran, Y. M. (2017). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin sanal dünyalarının günlük hayatlarına yansımaları üzerine bir durum çalışması. Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(21), 59-71.
  36. Kantor, B. P. (2023). The standard language ideology of Hebrew and Arabic grammarians of the Abbasid period. Open Book Publishers.
  37. Karapehlivan, F. (2015). Implications of the neoliberal restructuring of the state-education relationship for the right to education in Turkey. (Doktora Tezi). University of Essex.
  38. Karapehlivan, F. (2019, 1 Kasım). Constructing a “new Turkey” through education. Heinrich Böll Stiftung. https://tr.boell.org/en/2019/10/01/constructing-new-turkey-through-education
  39. Keyder, Ç. (2017). Türkiye’de devlet ve sınıflar (21. bs.). İletişim Yayınları.
  40. Kıyar, N. (2018). Türk sanat ortamında 80’ler ve değişim sürecinin düşündürdükleri. European Journal of Managerial Research, 2(2), 39-55.
  41. Korkmaz, D. F. (2006). Çağdaş kentte halk bilimi ve yeni bir sosyal grup: Tikiler. Milli Folklor, 71, 28-33.
  42. Kozanoğlu, H. (1993). Yuppieler ve bizim kuşak. İletişim Yayınları.
  43. Kroskrity, P. V. (1998). Arizona Tewa Kiva speech as a manifestation of a dominant language ideology. B. B. Schieffelin, K. A. Woolard, and P. V. Kroskrity (Yay. haz.), Language Ideologies içinde (ss. 103–122). Oxford University Press.
  44. Kroskrity, P. V. (2005). Language ideologies. A. Duranti (Yay. haz.), A companion to linguistic anthropology içinde (ss. 496-517. Wiley.
  45. Kramer, H. (1996). The EU-Turkey customs union: Economic integration amidst political turmoil. Mediterranean Politics, 1(1), 60-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629399608414567
  46. Lewis, G. (1999). Turkish language reform: A catasthropic success. Oxford University Press.
  47. Lippi-Green, R. (1997). English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. Routledge.
  48. Lüküslü, D. (2005). 1960’lardan 2000’lere gençlik tipleri: Maddeci, başarıcı, manager tipten yuppie’ye tiki’ye. Birikim Dergisi, 196, 30-36.
  49. Lytra, V. (2015). Language and language ideologies among Turkish-speaking young people in Athens and London. J. Nortier, ve B. A. Svendsen (Yay. haz.), Language, Youth and Identity in the 21st Century: Linguistic Practices across Urban Spaces içinde (ss. 183-204). Cambridge University Press.
  50. Lytra, V. vd. (2008). Language practices, language ideologies and identity construction in London Turkish complementary schools. V. Lytra ve J. N. Jorgensen (Yay. haz.), Multilingualism and Identities across Contexts: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives on Turkish-speaking Youth in Europe içinde (ss. 15-43). Uninversity of Copenhagen Press.
  51. Mardin, Ş. (2017). Türkiye’de toplum ve siyaset (23. bs.). İletişim Yayınları.
  52. Milroy, J. (1999). The consequences of standardisation in descriptive linguistics. T. Bex ve R. J. Watts (Yay. haz.), Standard English: The widening debate içinde (ss. 16-39). Routledge.
  53. Milroy, J. (2001). Language ideologies and the consequences of standardisation. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5, 530-555. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00163
  54. Milroy, J., ve Milroy, L. (1999). Authority in language: Investigating language prescription and standardisation. Routledge.
  55. Mogan, S. (2014). Beyaz yalaka. Okuyan Us Yayınları.
  56. Özmen, Z. (2015). Bir toplumsal tip: Plaza “i”nsanı. Sosyologca, 5(10). 251-266.
  57. Peirce, C. S. (1932). The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce: Elements of logic – Vol. II. Harvard University Press.
  58. Piller, I. (2015). Language ideologies. K. Tracy, C. Ilie, ve T. Sandel (Yay. haz.), The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction içinde (ss. 1-10). John Wiley & Sons.
  59. Reed, H. A. (1988). Islam and education in Turkey: Their roles in national development. Turkish Studies Association Bulletin, 12(1), 1-5. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43384190
  60. Romaine, S. (2007). Linguistic diversity and language standardization. M. Hellinger ve A. Pauwels (Yay. haz.), Handbook of language and communication: Diversity and change içinde (ss. 685-714). Mouton de Gruyter.
  61. Silverstein, M. (1976). Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. K. Basso ve H. Selby (Yay. haz.), Meaning in anthropology içinde (ss. 11-55). University of New Mexico Press.
  62. Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. P. Clyne, W. Hanks, ve C. Hofbauer (Yay. haz.), The elements içinde (ss. 193-248). Chicago Linguistic Society.
  63. Silverstein, M. (1998). Contemporary transformations of local linguistic communities. Annual Review of Anthropology, 27, 401-426. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.27.1.401
  64. Toprak, B. (1981). Islam and political development in Turkey. Brill.
  65. Uzun, N. B. (2019). Müzik ve kültür arasındaki ilişki bağlamında arabesk. Sanat ve İnsan Dergisi, 3(2), 1-6.
  66. Ün, S. (2019). Plaza dili üzerine toplum dil bilimsel bir inceleme. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü, Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul.
  67. Woolard, K. A. (1985). Language variation and cultural hegemony: Toward an integration of sociolinguistic and social theory. American Ethnologist, 2, 738-748. https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.1985.12.4.02a00090
  68. Woolard, K. A. (1989). Double talk: Bilingualism and the politics of ethnicity in Catalonia. Stanford University Press.
  69. Woolard, K. A. (2020). Language ideology. J. Stanlaw (Yay. haz.), The international encyclopedia of linguistic anthropology içinde (ss. 1-21). John Wiley & Sons.
  70. Woolard, K. A., ve Schieffelin, B. B. (1994). Language ideology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 23, 55-82. Yağlı, E. (2019). Değişkeci toplumdilbilim ve dil değişkenliği. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  71. Yağlı, E. (2024). Using the “proper one”: Language ideology in the context of Kemalism and neo-Ottomanism. New Perspectives on Turkey, 71, 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1017/npt.2024.6
  72. Yavan, N. (2010). The location choice of foreign direct investment within Turkey: An empirical analysis. European Planning Studies, 18(10), 1675-1705. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2010.504350
  73. Yılmaz, H. (2011). Learning to read (again): The social experiences of Turkey’s 1928 Alphabet Reform. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 43(4), 677-697. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743811000900
  74. Yurtbaşı, M. (2017). Türkiye’de 2000-2017 döneminde oluşan veya yaygınlaşan yeni sözler (neolojizmler). Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 40, 491-562. https://doi.org/10.16992/ASOS.12053 Yüce, C. B. (2019). Identity construction through language: The case of the Turkish Language Reform. The Journal of the Multicultural Society, 9(2), 100-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.14431/omnes.2019.07.9.2.100 Zhang, Q. (2005). A Chinese yuppie in Beijing: Phonological variation and the construction of a new professional identity. Language in Society, 34(3), 431-466. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050153 Zürcher, E. J. (2004). Turkey: A modern history. J. B. Tauris.