“…Invariably, the descriptions of 16 th -language managers (teachers and literary critics in particular) in Europe, for example, tended to equate the standard variety with correct speech, and consequently disparaged other dialects, which came to be associated with 'uneducated' and 'incorrect' usage. 5 Yet, the development of a standard language culture, according to Milroy (2007), has made language attitudes be dominated by a standard language ideology and purism in language history and historiography (see Milroy 2001aMilroy , 2007Milroy , 2012Riley 2012;or Langer and Nesse 2012), as well as in the reconstruction of prestige patterns (Sairio and Palander-Collin 2012), so that the history of any language is usually the history of its standard variety. The vernaculars were given a marginal treatment, if any, referring to "a form of language (usually speech) that is held to differ in significant ways from the socially approved prestige or standard language" and therefore not accepted "as the language for official transactions or intellectual endeavors" (Macaulay 2001: 420; see also Macaulay 1973Macaulay , 1997and _____________ 5 A clue to the awareness of a well-established standard, opposed to 'wrongful' habits, is found in the texts of playwrights.…”