Digraphia

In sociolinguistics, digraphia refers to the use of more than one

writing system for the same language.[1] Synchronic digraphia is
the coexistence of two or more writing systems for the same
language, while diachronic digraphia (or sequential digraphia)
is the replacement of one writing system by another for a
particular language.[2]

Hindustani, with an Urdu literary standard written in Urdu

alphabet and a Hindi standard written in Devanagari, is one of the
A digraphic Latin/Cyrillic street sign
'textbook examples'[3] of synchronic digraphia, cases where
in Gaboš, Croatia
writing systems are used contemporaneously. An example of
diachronic digraphia, where one writing system replaces another,
occurs in the case of Turkish, for which the traditional Arabic writing system was replaced with a Latin-
based system in 1928.[4][5]

Digraphia has implications in language planning, language policy, and language ideology.

Terminology

Etymology
English digraphia, like French digraphie, etymologically derives from Greek di- δι- "twice" and -graphia
-γραφία "writing".

Digraphia was modeled upon diglossia "the coexistence of two languages or dialects among a certain
population", which derives from Greek diglossos δίγλωσσος "bilingual." Charles A. Ferguson, a founder
of sociolinguistics, coined diglossia in 1959.[6] Grivelet analyzes how the influence of diglossia on the
unrelated notion of digraphia has "introduced some distortion in the process of defining digraphia," such
as distinguishing "high" and "low" varieties.[7] Peter Unseth notes one usage of "digraphia" that most
closely parallels Ferguson's "diglossia," situations where a language uses different scripts for different
domains; for instance, "shorthand in English, pinyin in Chinese for alphabetizing library files, etc. or
several scripts which are replaced by Latin script during e-mail usage."[8]

History
The Oxford English Dictionary, which does not yet include digraphia, enters two terms, digraph and
digraphic.[9] First, the linguistic term digraph is defined as, "A group of two letters expressing a simple
sound of speech". This meaning applies to both two letters representing a single speech sound in
orthography (e.g., English ng representing the velar nasal /ŋ/) and a single grapheme with two letters in
typographical ligature (e.g., the Old English Latin alphabet letter æ). Second, the graph theory term
digraph (a portmanteau from directed graph) is defined as, "A graph in which each line has a direction
associated with it; a finite, non-empty set of elements together with a set of ordered pairs of these
elements." The two digraph terms were first recorded in 1788 and 1955, respectively. The OED2 defines
two digraphic meanings, "Pertaining to or of the nature of a digraph" and "Written in two different
characters or alphabets." It gives their earliest examples in 1873 and 1880 (which was used meaning
"digraphia"). Isaac Hollister Hall, an American scholar of Oriental studies, described an Eteocypriot
language publication as "bilingual (or digraphic, as both inscriptions are in the same language)."[10] Hall's
article was antedated by Demetrios Pieridis's 1875 usage of digraphic instead of bilingual for an
inscription written in both the Greek alphabet and Cypriot syllabary.[11]

English digraphic and digraphia were contemporaneous with their corresponding terms in French
linguistics. In 1877, Julius Oppert introduced digraphique to describe languages written in cuneiform
syllabaries.[12] In 1893, Auguste Barth used French digraphisme for Cambodian inscriptions written in
Khmer script and Brāhmī script.[13] In 1971, Robèrt Lafont coined digraphie regarding the
sociolinguistics of French and Occitan.[14]

Although the word "digraphia" is new, the practice is ancient. Darius the Great's (c. 522-486 BCE)
Behistun Inscription was written in three cuneiform scripts for Old Persian, Elamite, and Babylonian.[15]

Neologizers
Four authors independently neologized English digraphia from diglossia.

The Songhay linguist Petr Zima (1974) first used "digraphia" to describe the Hausa language having two
writing systems, Boko (Latin script) and Ajami script (Arabic script).[16] Zima differentiated these paired
situations.

Digraphia: "Two types of written form of one language co-exist, based upon the usage of
two distinct graphical systems (scripts) by the respective language community."
Diorthographia: "Two types of written form of a particular language co-exist, using the same
script, but they are based upon the usage of two distinct orthographies by the same
language community."[17]
Usage of "diorthographia" is unusual. Compare dysgraphia meaning "a language disorder that affects a
person's ability to write" and dysorthographia "a synonym for dyslexia".

The anthropologist James R. Jaquith (1976), who studied unconventional spelling in advertising, used
"digraphia" to describe the practice of writing brand names in all caps (e.g., ARRID). He described
digraphia as "the graphic analog of what linguists call diglossia", and defined it as "different versions of a
written language exist simultaneously and in complementary distribution in a speech community."[18]

The sociolinguist Ian R. H. Dale (1980) wrote a general survey of digraphia, defined as, "the use of two
(or more) writing systems to represent varieties of a single language."[19]

The sinologist and lexicographer John DeFrancis (1984) used digraphia, defined as "the use of two or
more different systems of writing the same language," to translate Chinese shuangwenzhi (雙文制 "two-
script system") of writing in Chinese characters and Pinyin.[20] DeFrancis later explained, "I have been
incorrectly credited with coining the term digraphia, which I indeed thought I had created as a parallel in
writing to Charles Ferguson's diglossia in speech."[21]
Hegyi coined and suggested the terms "bigraphism" and "multigraphism",[22] but he only used them twice
(p. 265; fn. 17, p. 268) and did not promote the use of either of these terms, nor follow up on his insights
into the importance of studying "the use of two or more different writing systems for the same language...
such cases have been more widespread than commonly assumed."

Usage
Digraphia is an uncommon term in current English usage. For instance, the Corpus of Contemporary
American English, which includes over 425,000,000 words, lists digraphia three times in "academic
genre" contexts.

Stéphane Grivelet, who edited a special "Digraphia: Writing systems and society" issue of the
International Journal of the Sociology of Language, explains.[23]

After 25 years and various articles on the subject, there are still important differences in the
scope of the definition, and the notion itself is rarely used in sociolinguistics, apart from the
field of Chinese studies, where the notion of digraphia is nowadays frequently used to describe
the coexistence of two writing systems: Chinese script and Pinyin.[24]

Digraphia has some rare synonyms. Orthographic diglossia antedates digraphia, and was noted by Paul
Wexler in 1971."[25] Bigraphism, bialphabetism, and biscriptality are infrequently used.

Some scholars avoid using the word "digraphia". Describing terminology for "script obsolescence,"
Stephen D. Houston, John Baines, and Jerrold Cooper say, "'Biscript' refers to a text in two different
writing systems. 'Biliteracy' and 'triliteracy' label the concurrent use of two or three scripts."[26]

Theoretical aspects
Digraphia can be either "synchronic" (or "concurrent") or "diachronic" ("historical" or "sequential"),[27]
extending Ferdinand de Saussure's classic division between synchronic linguistics and diachronic
linguistics. Dale first differentiated "diachronic (or historical) digraphia" ("more than one writing system
used for a given language in successive periods of time") and "synchronic digraphia" ("more than one
writing system used contemporaneously for the same language").[28] Dale concluded that,

Two primary factors have been identified as operating on a society in the choice of script for
representing its language. These are the prevailing cultural influence (often a religion) and the
prevailing political influence of the period in which the choice is made. Synchronic digraphia
results when more than one such influence is operating and none can dominate all groups of
speakers of the language in question [ … ] Diachronic digraphia results when different
influences prevail over a given speech community at different times.[29]

Some recent scholarship questions the practicality of this synchronic/diachronic distinction. Grivelet
contends that, "digraphia is a single sociolinguistic process with two types of outcome (concurrent or
sequential digraphia) and with specific features related to the causes and types of development of the
various cases.[30]
Peter Unseth lists and exemplifies four factors that can influence a language community's choice of a
script.[31]

1. "To identify themselves with a group." In the 1940s, Mongolia replaced the traditional
Mongolian script first briefly with the Mongolian Latin alphabet and then, under Soviet
influence, with the Mongolian Cyrillic alphabet. From the 1980s, the Mongolian script was
reintroduced into schools for its historical and cultural importance.
2. "To distance themselves from a group." In the mid-19th century, the LDS Church developed
and promoted the Deseret alphabet for English. Brigham Young publicly claimed it was more
phonetically accurate than Latin script and would facilitate learning to read and write
English. However, historian David Bigler says the Deseret alphabet "demonstrated cultural
exclusivism, an important consideration. It also kept secrets from curious non-Mormons,
[and] controlled what children would be allowed to read."[32]
3. Participation in developments on a broader scale. The choice of a script can influence a
group's preparedness to interact with other regional or international groups. For instance,
the Hmong language has numerous alternate writing systems. Hmong who live in Southeast
Asia prefer the indigenous Romanized Popular Alphabet (RPA) or the Pahawh Hmong semi-
syllabary; Hmong expatriates who live in the United States prefer to romanize names
differently, such as Latin Hmong instead of RPA Hmoob.
4. "Linguistic considerations." Sometimes a foreign script is rejected because it is unsuitable
for the phonetics of a language. Korean was first written in logographic Hanja Chinese
characters, but king Sejong the Great promulgated the Korean alphabet, which is better
suited for transcribing Korean phonology. In the present day, North Korea uses only the
alphabet, which it calls Chosŏn'gŭl. South Korea uses both Hanja and the alphabet, which it
calls Hangul. The different names of the alphabet reflect the different names of Korea.
Linguists who study language and gender have analyzed gender-differentiated speech varieties
("genderlects", usually spoken by women), and there are a few cases of scripts predominantly used by
women. Japanese hiragana was initially a women's script, for instance, used by Murasaki Shikibu to
write The Tale of Genji. Chinese Nüshu script (literally "women's writing) is a simplification of characters
that was traditionally used by women in Jiangyong County of Hunan province.[33]

Not only scripts, but also letters can have iconic power to differentiate social groups. For example, the
names of many heavy metal bands (e.g., Motörhead, Infernäl Mäjesty, Mötley Crüe) use umlauts "to
index the musical genre as well as the notion of 'Gothic' more generally."[34] This digraphic usage is
called the "metal umlaut" (or "röck döts").

Synchronic digraphia
Synchronic digraphia is the coexistence of two or more writing systems for the same language. A modern
example is the Serbo-Croatian language,[35] which is written in either the Serbian Cyrillic alphabet or
Gaj's Latin alphabet. Although most speakers can read and write both scripts, Catholic Croats and Muslim
Bosniaks generally use Latin, while Orthodox Serbs and Montenegrins generally use Cyrillic. However,
older indigenous scripts were used much earlier, most notably Bosnian Cyrillic.[36] Inuktitut is also
officially digraphic, using both Latin and Inuktitut syllabics. In Hindustani, the Devanagari or Urdu script
generally follows the Hindi and Urdu standards and the speaker's religious affiliation, though Urdu is
sometimes written in Devanagari in India. Digraphia is limited, however, in that most people know only
one script. Similarly, depending on which side of the Punjab border a Punjabi language speaker lives in,
India or Pakistan, and religious affiliation, they will use the Gurmukhi or Shahmukhi script respectively.
The former shares similarities with Devanagari and the latter is essentially a derivative of the Urdu
writing script (Perso-Arabic). The Arvanitic dialect of Albanian is written in both the Greek alphabet and
Latin (Δασκαρίνα Πινότσ̈ ι/Dhaskarina Pinoçi.)

The Japanese writing system has unusually complex digraphia. William C. Hannas distinguishes two
digraphic forms of Japanese: "true digraphia" of occasionally using rōmaji Latin alphabet for a few
loanwords like DVD, and of regularly using three scripts (technically, "trigraphia") for different functions.
Japanese is written with kanji "Chinese character" logographs used for both Sino-Japanese vocabulary as
well as native vocabulary; hiragana used for native Japanese words without kanji or difficult kanji, and
for grammatical endings; and katakana used for foreign borrowings or graphic emphasis.[37] Nihon, for
instance, the primary name of Japan, is normally written 日本 (literally, "sun's origin") in kanji – but is
occasionally written に ほ ん in hiragana, ニ ホ ン in katakana, or Nihon in rōmaji ("romanization").
Japanese users have a certain amount of flexibility in choosing between scripts, and their choices can
have social meaning.[38]

Another example is the Malay language, which most often uses the
Latin alphabet, while in certain geographic areas (Kelantan state of
Malaysia, Brunei) it is also written with an adapted Arabic alphabet
called Jawi. Adaptations of the Arabic script are also widely used across
the Malay Archipelago since the introduction of Islam. In Java,
Javanese people, which were predominantly ruled by Hindu and
Buddha kingdoms, have their own writing system, called Hanacaraka.
When the Islamic power took place, a modified Arabic writing system
(called Pegon) was introduced, along with the massive introduction of
the Latin alphabet by western colonialists. This results in the use of
three writing systems to write modern Javanese, either based on a
particular context (religious, cultural or normal), or sometimes also
written simultaneously. This phenomenon also occurred in some other The use of Javanese script,
cultures in Indonesia. Pegon (modified Arabic script)
and Latin alphabet for coffee
An element of synchronic digraphia is present in many languages not packaging in Indonesia saying
using the Latin script, in particular in text messages and when typing on 100% Pure Coffee Powder.
a computer which does not have the facility to represent the usual script
for that language. In such cases, Latin script is often used, although
systems of transcription are often not standardised.

Digraphia is controversial in modern Written Chinese. The ongoing debate on traditional and simplified
Chinese characters concerns "diglyphia" or "pluricentricity" rather than digraphia. Chinese digraphia
involves the use of both Chinese characters and Hanyu Pinyin romanization. Pinyin is officially approved
for a few special uses, such as annotating characters for learners of Chinese and transcribing Chinese
names.[39] Nevertheless, Pinyin continues to be adopted for other functions, such as computers,
education, library catalogs, and merchandise labels.[40] Among Chinese input methods for computers,
Pinyin is the most popular phonetic method. Zhou Youguang predicts, "Digraphia is perhaps the key for
Chinese to enter the age of Information processing."[41] Many writers, both from China (e.g., Mao Dun
and Zhou Youguang) and from abroad (e.g., John DeFrancis, Victor H. Mair, J. Marshall Unger, and
William Hannas[42]) have argued for digraphia to be implemented as a Chinese language standard. These
digraphic reformers call for a generalized use of Pinyin orthography along with Chinese characters. Yat-
Shing Cheung differentiates three Chinese digraphic situations. (1) Both the High and the Low forms
derive from the same script system: traditional and simplified characters. (2) Both forms derive from the
same system but the Low form borrows foreign elements: Putonghua and Fangyan. (3) The High and the
Low forms derive from two different script systems: Chinese characters and pinyin.[43]

Other examples of synchronic digraphia:

Balinese was written in the Balinese script especially in palm-leaf manuscripts for religious
purposes. However, similar to Javanese, it is now largely written in Latin. Attempts to
popularize the script through counseling and using it public spaces are supported by the
local government.
Javanese was written in the Javanese script, but is now largely written in Latin. Attempts to
reintroduce the Javanese script are gaining popularity. The use of Pegon is limited to
pesantren, traditional Islamic boarding schools.
Kashmiri is written in Sharada, Devanagari, Nastaliq, and Latin scripts.[44]
Kazakh is written in Arabic in Xinjiang;[45] in Kazakhstan, it is written in Cyrillic (though, in an
instance of diachronic digraphia, it is slated to be replaced there by Latin in 2025).[46]
Konkani is written in five scripts: Devanagari, Kannada, Latin, Malayalam and Perso-Arabic.
Marathi was historically written simultaneously in Balbodh Devanagari and Modi script until
the 1940s, after which Devanagari was preferred over Modi script due to a lack of printing
infrastructure for the latter.[47]
Punjabi uses two different writing systems: the Brahmic Gurmukhi script used in Indian
Punjab, and the Perso-Arabic Shahmukhi used in Pakistani Punjab.
Sundanese now largely written in Latin, was written in both the Sundanese script and the
Javanese script. The reintroduction of the Sundanese script has gained popularity in recent
years.
Tashelhit was historically written in Perso-Arabic and there are still people who use it. The
Latin script is mostly common among people, while the Tifinagh script is the official script but
not widely found outside of official uses.
Uzbek was written in the Cyrillic script from the 1940s until 1993, when a Latin-based
alphabet was made official in Uzbekistan. While the Latin-based alphabet is widely used
online, the Cyrillic alphabet is just as common on the Internet and is still the main script of
most of the printed media, with most people able to read both much as in Serbia.

Diachronic digraphia
Diachronic or sequential digraphia, in which a language switches writing systems, can occur gradually
through language change or more quickly though language reform. Turkish switched from Arabic script
to Latin within one year, under reforms ordered by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, while the transition from
writing Korean in Chinese characters to writing in Hangul took hundreds of years.[8]

There are many examples of languages that used to be written in a script, which was replaced later.
Examples are Romanian (which originally used Cyrillic and changed to Latin) in the 1860s; Vietnamese
(which switched from a form of Chinese writing called Chữ Nôm to the Latin alphabet); Turkish,
Swahili, Somali, and (partially) Malay, which all switched from Arabic script to the Latin alphabet, and
many countries of the former Soviet Union, which abandoned the Cyrillic script after the dissolution of
the USSR such as Moldova, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan which all switched from Cyrillic
to Latin. As old literature in the earlier scripts remains, there is typically some continuing overlap in use,
by scholars studying earlier texts, reprinting of earlier materials for contemporary readers and other
limited uses.[48]

The Azerbaijani language provides an extreme example of diachronic digraphia; it has historically been
written in Old Turkic, Arabic, Latin, Cyrillic, and again Latin alphabets.[8][49]

Other examples of diachronic digraphia:

In Kazakhstan, Kazakh is written in Cyrillic, but a switch to Latin has been scheduled to take
place in 2025.[46]
Malay was traditionally written in Jawi, but that has now been largely replaced by Latin.[50]
Mongolian was written previously in Mongolian script (with many short-lived alternatives
including ʼPhags-pa), and eventually to Cyrillic. By 2025, the Mongolian government hopes
to re-instate the Mongolian script (alongside Cyrillic).[51]

See also
Official script
Diglossia

References
1. Dale, Ian R.H. (1980). "Digraphia". International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 1980
(26): 5–13. doi:10.1515/ijsl.1980.26.5 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fijsl.1980.26.5).
2. Cheung, Yat-Shing (1992). "The form and meaning of digraphia: the case of Chinese". In K.
Bolton; H. Kwok (eds.). Sociolinguistics Today: International Perspectives. London:
Routledge.
3. Ahmad, Rizwan (June 2011). "Urdu in Devanagari: Shifting orthographic practices and
Muslim identity in Delhi" (https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S004740451100
0182/type/journal_article). Language in Society. 40 (3): 259–284.
doi:10.1017/S0047404511000182 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0047404511000182).
hdl:10576/10736 (https://hdl.handle.net/10576%2F10736). ISSN 0047-4045 (https://search.
worldcat.org/issn/0047-4045). S2CID 55975387 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:5
5975387).
4. Aytürk, İlker (2008). "The First Episode of Language Reform in Republican Turkey: The
Language Council from 1926 to 1931" (https://www.jstor.org/stable/27755954). Journal of
the Royal Asiatic Society. 18 (3): 281. doi:10.1017/S1356186308008511 (https://doi.org/10.
1017%2FS1356186308008511). hdl:11693/49487 (https://hdl.handle.net/11693%2F49487).
ISSN 1356-1863 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1356-1863). JSTOR 27755954 (https://ww
w.jstor.org/stable/27755954). S2CID 162474551 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1
62474551).
5. "Tūrk Harflerinin Kabul ve Tatbiki Hakkında Kanun" (http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMeti
n/1.3.1353.pdf) (PDF) (in Turkish).
6. Ferguson, Charles A (1959). "Diglossia" (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00437956.1959.116597
02). Word. 15 (2): 325–340. doi:10.1080/00437956.1959.11659702 (https://doi.org/10.108
0%2F00437956.1959.11659702). S2CID 239352211 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/Corpu
sID:239352211).
7. Grivelet (2001), p. 5.
 8. Unseth (2005), p. 36.
9. Oxford English Dictionary (2009). 2nd ed., v. 4.0.
10. Hall, Isaac Hollister (1880). "The Cypriote Inscriptions". Scribner's Monthly, vol. 20, p. 205 (h
ttps://books.google.com/books?id=4YwPAQAAIAAJ&q=digraphic&pg=PA205).
11. Pierides, Demetrios (1875). "On a digraphic inscription found in Larnaca" (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=ursMAAAAIAAJ&q=On%20a%20digraphic%20inscription%20found%20i
n%20Larnaca&pg=PA38). Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology. 4 (1): 38–43.
12. Oppert, Jules (1877). [Review of] François Lenormant, Études sur quelques parties des
syllabaires cunéiformes, Paris 1877; idem, Les syllabaires cunéiformes, Paris 1877.
Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 1877(45–46). 1409–1449.
13. Bergaigne, Abel (1893). Inscriptions sanscrites du Cambodge [edited and commented by
Auguste Barth]. Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale et autres
bibliothèques 27(1). 293–588.
14. Lafont, Robert (1971). "Un problème de culpabilité sociologique: La diglossie franco-
occitane" (http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/lfr_0023-8368_1971_num
_9_1_5576). Langue française. 9 (1): 93–99. doi:10.3406/lfr.1971.5576 (https://doi.org/10.34
06%2Flfr.1971.5576).
15. Unseth, Peter (2005). "Sociolinguistic parallels between choosing scripts and languages".
Written Language & Literacy. 8 (1): 36. doi:10.1075/wll.8.1.02uns (https://doi.org/10.1075%2
Fwll.8.1.02uns).
16. Zima, Petr (1974). "Digraphia: The case of Hausa" (http://related.springerprotocols.com/lp/d
e-gruyter/digraphia-the-case-of-hausa-ZFtJZ8w2Kk). Linguistics. 12 (124): 57–69.
doi:10.1515/ling.1974.12.124.57 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fling.1974.12.124.57).
S2CID 144052831 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:144052831).
17. Zima (1974), p. 58.
18. Jaquith, James R (1976). "Digraphia in advertising: The public as guinea pig". Visible
Language. 10 (4): 303.
19. Dale, Ian R. H. (1980). "Digraphia" (https://web.archive.org/web/20111007201951/http://uk-
online.uni-koeln.de/remarks/d5134/rm2173940.doc). International Journal of the Sociology
of Language. 1980 (26): 5–13. doi:10.1515/ijsl.1980.26.5 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fijsl.19
80.26.5). Archived from the original (http://uk-online.uni-koeln.de/remarks/d5134/rm217394
0.doc) on 2011-10-07. Retrieved 2011-08-30.
20. DeFrancis, John (1984). "Digraphia" (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00437956.1984.1143574
8). Word. 35: 59–66. doi:10.1080/00437956.1984.11435748 (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00
437956.1984.11435748).
21. DeFrancis, John (2006). Prospects for Chinese Writing Reform (http://www.sino-platonic.or
g/complete/spp171_chinese_writing_reform.pdf), Sino-Platonic Papers 171.
22. Hegyi, O. 1979. Minority and restricted uses of the Arabic alphabet: the aljamiado
phenomenon. Journal of the American Oriental Society Vol. 99, No. 2:262-269.
23. Grivelet, Stéphane (2001). "Introduction", "Digraphia: Writing systems and society".
International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 150: 1–10. doi:10.1515/ijsl.2001.037 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1515%2Fijsl.2001.037).
24. Grivelet (2001), p. 1.
25. Wexler, Paul (1971). "Diglossia, language standardization and purism." Lingua 27, 340.
"Orthographic differences are not always a reflection of ethnocultural differences and
multiple standards. Different scripts may be used by a single ethnic group for different
purposes (e.g., secular versus religious literature), in which case we could speak of
'orthographic diglossia'."
26. Houston, S.; Baines, J.; Cooper, J. (2003). "Last writing: Script obsolescence in Egypt,
Mesopotamia, and Mesoamerica" (http://neareast.jhu.edu/bin/g/o/jc%20Last%20Writing.pdf)
(PDF). Comparative Studies in Society and History. 45 (3): 432.
doi:10.1017/s0010417503000227 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0010417503000227).
S2CID 145542213 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:145542213).
27. DeFrancis (1984), p. 60 uses concurrent and sequential.
28. Dale (1980), p. 6.
29. Dale (1980), p. 12.
30. Grivelet (2001), p. 6.
31. Unseth, Peter (2005). "Sociolinguistic parallels between choosing scripts and languages".
Written Language & Literacy. 8 (1): 22–29. doi:10.1075/wll.8.1.02uns (https://doi.org/10.107
5%2Fwll.8.1.02uns).
32. Bigler, David (1998). Forgotten kingdom: the Mormon theocracy in the American West,
1847–1896, p. 56. Arthur Clark.
33. Unseth (2005), p. 37.
34. Sebba (2009), p 40.
35. Ivković, Dejan (2013). "Pragmatics meets ideology: Digraphia and non-standard
orthographic practices in Serbian online news forums". Journal of Language and Politics.
12: 335–356. doi:10.1075/jlp.12.3.02ivk (https://doi.org/10.1075%2Fjlp.12.3.02ivk).
36. Trager, George L (1974). "Writing and writing systems". Current Trends in Linguistics. 12:
413.
37. Hannas, William C. (1997). Asia's Orthographic Dilemma. University of Hawaii Press, pp.
299-300.
38. Sebba, Mark (2009). "Sociolinguistic approaches to writing systems research". Writing
Systems Research. 1 (1): 38. doi:10.1093/wsr/wsp002 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fwsr%2F
wsp002). S2CID 143714940 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:143714940).
39. Xieyan Hincha (2004). Two Steps Toward Digraphia in China (http://www.sino-platonic.org/c
omplete/spp134_chinese_digraphia.pdf). Sino-Platonic Papers 134.
40. DeFrancis (1984), p. 64.
41. Youguang, Zhou (1986). "Modernization of the Chinese Language" (http://plosjournal.deepd
yve.com/lp/de-gruyter/modernization-of-the-chinese-language-SmsCBMDYNZ).
International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 1986 (59): 7–23.
doi:10.1515/ijsl.1986.59.7 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Fijsl.1986.59.7). S2CID 143777969 (htt
ps://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:143777969).
42. Hannas, William C. (1997). Asia's Orthographic Dilemma. University of Hawaii Press.
43. Cheung, Yat-Shing (1992). "The form and meaning of digraphia: the case of Chinese". In K.
Bolton and H. Kwok. Sociolinguistics Today: International Perspectives. 210-215. Routledge.
44. "Kashmiri language | Britannica" (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Kashmiri-language).
www.britannica.com. Retrieved 2022-06-15.
45. Zhou, Minglang (2003). Multilingualism in China : the politics of writing reforms for minority
languages, 1949-2002 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/868954061). Berlin. ISBN 978-3-11-
092459-6. OCLC 868954061 (https://search.worldcat.org/oclc/868954061).
46. Welle (www.dw.com), Deutsche, Kazakhstan rewrites its alphabet to shed its Soviet past |
DW | 01.07.2019 (https://www.dw.com/en/kazakhstan-rewrites-its-alphabet-to-shed-its-sovie
t-past/a-49434285), retrieved 2022-06-15
47. "Modi Lipi or Modi Script: History Of Modi Lipi" (https://web.archive.org/web/2013102518343
5/http://www.modilipi.in/2011/02/modi-script-of-maharashtra-script-which.html#.VIQQuhrj66
w). 2013-10-25. Archived from the original (http://www.modilipi.in/2011/02/modi-script-of-ma
harashtra-script-which.html) on 2013-10-25. Retrieved 2020-02-04.
48. DeFrancis (1984), p. 60.
49. Hatcher, Lynley. 2008. Script change in Azerbaijan: acts of identity. International Journal of
the Sociology of Language 192:105–116.
50. "From Jawi to Rumi: The Preservation of Malay Manuscripts as a Cultural Heritage" (https://
www.ifla.org/news/from-jawi-to-rumi-the-preservation-of-malay-manuscripts-as-a-cultural-he
ritage/). IFLA. Retrieved 2022-06-15.
51. "Official documents to be recorded in both scripts from 2025" (https://www.montsame.mn/e
n/read/219358). MONTSAME News Agency. Retrieved 2022-03-25.

Relevant literature
Iyengar, Arvind. 2021. A diachronic analysis of Sindhi multiscriptality. Journal of Historical
Sociolinguistics 6.1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsl-2019-0027

External links
New Perspectives on Digraphia (http://www.omniglot.com/language/articles/digraphia/index.
htm), Elena Berlanda
Biscriptality – Sociolinguistic and Cultural Scenarios Conference (http://biscriptality.org/),
Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Writing Systems and Society, "Scripts become flags" (https://web.archive.org/web/20111011
124013/http://home.vicnet.net.au/~ozideas/writsoc.htm), Ozideas
Diglossia as a Sociolinguistic Situation (https://web.archive.org/web/20111006231020/http://
www.modlinguistics.com/Sociolinguistics/diglossia/Diglossia%20as%20a%20Sociolinguisti
c%20Situation.htm), Harold F. Schiffman

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digraphia&oldid=1252201470"