One form of language planning constitutes, in essence, a preconceived and systematic interference with the normal dynamic processes to which every language is subject, be it in terms of channelling such processes into a specific direction, artificially accelerating or retarding them, encouraging some of their facets at the expense of others, or even introducing into the languages features that lie outside their rules and setup. A different system of language planning is concerned with artificially interfering with the existing social and functional status of a given language by means of channelling it in certain directions, or in general either broadening and/or elevating its role and standing, or narrowing it to the point of suppression. This situation creates a terminological problem: it may seem appropriate to apply the label “language planning” to the latter variety only, and “language engineering” to the former. Alternatively, “language planning” could be used to refer to the stages of deliberation and programmatic planning in preparation for active interference with a language or languages in any form, and “language engineering” to the processes of this active interference itself […]. However, for our purposes we shall employ the terms “internal language planning” for the first and “external language planning” for the second of the two possibilities, though there may be some difficulties in establishing a clearcut boundary between the two in all cases.
- Wurm (1977), a pag.335-336