In Serbia, script diversity remains the norm whereby Serbian is routinely written in both the Cyrillic and Latin alphabets. This is not free of political contestation. Metadiscourses construct... Show moreIn Serbia, script diversity remains the norm whereby Serbian is routinely written in both the Cyrillic and Latin alphabets. This is not free of political contestation. Metadiscourses construct Cyrillic as the authentic script and central to ethnoidentity or, alternatively, as indexing dangerous nationalism, conservatism and Russian-leaning politics. On the flip side, metadiscourse associates Latin with modernity and progress, but for some with unwelcomed Western influence. But how do individuals themselves understand script preferences? This paper takes a folk linguistic approach to investigate whether the metalinguistic talk of Serbian individuals about script preferences is indeed informed by political metadiscourse. The data concern not only the stated preferences of individuals but also, borrowing from theory of mind, metatalk about how people explain the script preferences of others. The paper shows that the ideological oppositionality presupposed in metadiscourse tends not to be validated in metalinguistic talk, reminding us to be cognisant of chasms between societal-level metadiscourse and the lived experiences of individuals, and to avoid assumptions about the reach and impact of critical metadiscourse. Show less
Both the Cyrillic and Latin scripts are routinely used for writing in Serbian. In existing ideological discourses, using Cyrillic is associated by some with Serbian ethnic authenticity and loyalty... Show moreBoth the Cyrillic and Latin scripts are routinely used for writing in Serbian. In existing ideological discourses, using Cyrillic is associated by some with Serbian ethnic authenticity and loyalty to nationhood, but by others with conservatism, Russian-leaning politics and dangerous ethnonationalism. For some, using Latin is associated with cosmopolitanism and a western-leaning internationalisation, but for others with an assault on Serbian heritage, values and tradition. In this context, with which script do Serbians today most closely affiliate and does established ideological discourse actually inform script choices? By seeing this affiliation as linguistic citizenship, the paper analyses survey data and metalinguistic explanations about which script Serbians choose to represent their own names as the most personal of identities. The data show that while some simply write their name in either script depending on habit, younger Serbians, and Serbians outside metropolitan areas, seemingly bias Cyrillic for ethnonationalist reasons as discourse predicts. However, especially revealing is that linguistic citizenship among older Serbians is sooner mediated by lingering notions of Yugoslavia and Serbo-Croatian as country and language that no longer exist but once indexed ideals of equality and harmony in the region. Show less
