English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Common definitions of pluricentricity rely on the notions of  centre ,  nation , and  norm , frequently without, however, offering sufficient detail on what precisely these mean. These terms are often applied to classify languages as pluricentric or not, without adequately recognising intra-linguistic variation and dynamics of power within a speaker community (language ownership). Using the example of a national minority language from North-West Germany, North Frisian, this article discusses how a narrow reading of the definition of pluricentricity would deny such a status to this language, when in fact the sociolinguistic situation of North Frisian matches that of many acknowledged pluricentric languages. Instead, the article suggests that the term  nation  should no longer be equated with  state , that the term  centre  be further specified to determine what institution or which individuals have authority over language, and that the term  norm  be more clearly articulated to account for the variability in “correct” language use.

Pluricentricity and minority languages: the difficult case of North Frisian