Grzelak, Eliza2014-09-302014-09-302014-06Studia Europaea Gnesnensia, 9/2014, s. 43-55978-83-7654-166-22082-5951http://hdl.handle.net/10593/11733In the article, the author suggests an internal division of the community codes, regardless of their ethnic extent. She sets out from a critical presentation of functional divisions of Polish which have been advanced so far, and which rely on the structural perception of language. Demonstrating their inadequacy and the frequent modifications, the author draws on the sociolinguistic theories of B. Bernstein, ethnolinguistic concepts of Sapir-Whorf and the philosophical notions of W.Humboldt and J.G.Herder in order to show that the cultural factor should be the basis of distinguishing between internal community codes. She also draws attention to the universalisation of the community codes which, due to globalisation processes, begin to function on the boundaries of ethnic languages. The author concludes that codes used in community communication of populations isolated not only through linguistic analyses but most of all in the course of cultural differentiation, include, apart from the verbal signs, all other signs which serve the communication within the community. Consequently, they may be identified with the functional variant of ethnic language only within the field of verbal transmission. However, when they become universal and go beyond the limits of ethnic codes as well as trigger communication on all semiotic levels, they become one of the communication codes which typologize social communication within defined cultures and at their boundaries.The author collected the most important findings concerning the internal diversification of the ethnic language (using Polish as an example) and, treating those concepts as a starting point, set out to present the contemporary universal linguistic, discursive and communicative communities. While stressing the high diversification of codes within the communities, the author returns to the rhetorical, adequately defined concept of three styles. In her description of the code of communicative community, the author draws a reference to the communal nature of rendering the image of the world and highlights its intersemiotic, supraethnic and universal character.plETHNOLINGUISTICSFUNCTIONAL DIVISION OF LANGUAGEINTERNAL DIVERSIFICATION OF LANGUAGELANGUAGE COMMUNITIESDISCURSIVE COMMUNITIESCOMMUNICATION COMMUNITIESArtykułhttps://doi.org/10.14746/seg.2014.9.3