We are independent & ad-supported. We may earn a commission for purchases made through our links.

Advertiser Disclosure

Our website is an independent, advertising-supported platform. We provide our content free of charge to our readers, and to keep it that way, we rely on revenue generated through advertisements and affiliate partnerships. This means that when you click on certain links on our site and make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn more.

How We Make Money

We sustain our operations through affiliate commissions and advertising. If you click on an affiliate link and make a purchase, we may receive a commission from the merchant at no additional cost to you. We also display advertisements on our website, which help generate revenue to support our work and keep our content free for readers. Our editorial team operates independently from our advertising and affiliate partnerships to ensure that our content remains unbiased and focused on providing you with the best information and recommendations based on thorough research and honest evaluations. To remain transparent, we’ve provided a list of our current affiliate partners here.

What Is a Language Code?

By Mark Wollacott
Updated Jan 23, 2024
Our promise to you
LanguageHumanities is dedicated to creating trustworthy, high-quality content that always prioritizes transparency, integrity, and inclusivity above all else. Our ensure that our content creation and review process includes rigorous fact-checking, evidence-based, and continual updates to ensure accuracy and reliability.

Our Promise to you

Founded in 2002, our company has been a trusted resource for readers seeking informative and engaging content. Our dedication to quality remains unwavering—and will never change. We follow a strict editorial policy, ensuring that our content is authored by highly qualified professionals and edited by subject matter experts. This guarantees that everything we publish is objective, accurate, and trustworthy.

Over the years, we've refined our approach to cover a wide range of topics, providing readers with reliable and practical advice to enhance their knowledge and skills. That's why millions of readers turn to us each year. Join us in celebrating the joy of learning, guided by standards you can trust.

Editorial Standards

At LanguageHumanities, we are committed to creating content that you can trust. Our editorial process is designed to ensure that every piece of content we publish is accurate, reliable, and informative.

Our team of experienced writers and editors follows a strict set of guidelines to ensure the highest quality content. We conduct thorough research, fact-check all information, and rely on credible sources to back up our claims. Our content is reviewed by subject matter experts to ensure accuracy and clarity.

We believe in transparency and maintain editorial independence from our advertisers. Our team does not receive direct compensation from advertisers, allowing us to create unbiased content that prioritizes your interests.

A language code is an attempt to codify all languages of the world, as well as those language’s major dialects in a short, codified form. The objective is for any language to be identifiable as a simple letter code rather than having to be spelled out in full. The idea of the language code is similar to the adoption of three-letter short forms for countries across the world, which turns England into ENG and Wales into WAL.

The Library of Congress in the United States is one such organization to codify languages from across the world. While it demonstrates a noble attempt to create a language code, it also demonstrates many of the problems with trying to do so. For example, English is naturally condensed to ENG. It, however, then lists Middle English as ENM and Old English as ANG. The latter two codes would make little sense to most academics and a good number of non-academics. This is because the more common codes for Middle English and Old English are ME and OE, respectively.

The problem with language codes is that many nations, as well as organizations and academics, use different codes for the same languages. This has led to a patchwork of confusing acronyms that are only heightened by linguistic and political considerations. The lack of a common code means that documents on the same topic could cause confusion by using different codes.

Another question is whether to differentiate between versions of the same language as spoken in different countries. This means deciding whether to differentiate between British English and American English. It also raises the question of whether to differentiate between the national dialect and regional dialects. For example, the difference between Queens English in England and Scots English or Scouse, as spoken in Liverpool, could be codified. The Library of Congress code does not differentiate, but the Microsoft® language code does.

A solution to the problem would be to create a unified language code. This would be a code accepted by all nations and peoples of the world, whatever their language. There are, however, a number of problems to be overcome to create this.

First, no one nation should have the power to decide, as there will naturally be conflicts. Second, the code would have to take into account the different languages themselves and how each language describes itself. Third, there is the problem of different alphabets.

The code would have to take into account a nation's or dialect’s wish to have a separate code. This could be done by having a general code for the language, then adding a hyphen and a country or dialect code. This could turn American English into AM-ENG or ENG-AM. One question that would need considering is whether the nation or group that birthed the language has the right for its language code to be the simple language code, thus turning the code for British English into ENG rather than UK-ENG or ENG-ENG.

LanguageHumanities is dedicated to providing accurate and trustworthy information. We carefully select reputable sources and employ a rigorous fact-checking process to maintain the highest standards. To learn more about our commitment to accuracy, read our editorial process.

Discussion Comments

LanguageHumanities, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.

LanguageHumanities, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.