The term language planning was first used in a short article by E. Haugen, published in 1959. Initially, this somewhat vague term covered concepts such as the norm of a language, the culture of a language, and linguistic aesthetics. The author considered the planning process as one of the types of human activity that arises from the need to find a solution to a problem. This activity, according to E. Haugen, can be absolutely informal, but can be organized and deliberate. It can be carried out both by private individuals and official institutions. Social planning in our society is an activity with very specific tasks, although different countries find it acceptable in specific areas to a varying degree [Haugen 1975: 444].
In the future, the term language planning was clarified. By linguistic planning, the American linguist understood any influence on the language carried out by certain organizations or individuals and having an official or unofficial character.
In addition, it was E. Haugen who proposed the experience of typology of language problems, distinguishing between: a) choice of norm; b) codification of the norm; c) implementation of the norm in the language community; d) adaptation of the language to perform new functions.
A little later, the concept of “language planning” was most clearly formulated by X. Kloss (1969), who proposed distinguishing between “corpus planning” and “status planning”. The first concept concerned the internal development of the language (fixing the norm, the development of terminology, streamlining spelling), while the second concerned the position of the language in society, in accordance with other languages in the given society. However, already in 1983. E. Haugen proposed a more detailed definition of the concept of “language planning” in accordance with such parameters as form – function and society – language [Daoust; Maurais 1987:
Then the concept of language planning began to be associated with sociopolitical problems. It is seen as a means of resolving social, economic, and political problems through language [Hack 1989: 106].