1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 45, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 45, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

While previous studies have outlined the advantages of semiotic resources for meaning making and relationship building, not all semiotic resources are equal in their ability to enhance these features. Using linguistic ethnographic interviews and focus group discussions, this article examines whether mobile phones provide sufficient semiotic resources for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) migrants to effectively communicate, particularly for service situations regarding finances where they often have to speak in English with unknown interlocutors. Two important elements are uncovered regarding EFL migrants’ difficulty in using phones as a semiotic resource – (1) linguistic superiority, where they are judged by their English-speaking interlocutor as engaging in inferior English practices, and (2) paralinguistic insufficiency, where the lack of gestures and facial expressions takes away their ability to make meaning. These elements combined make telephone conversations difficult for many EFL migrants, affecting their expressiveness and ability to effectively communicate, leading to negative outcomes such as avoidance behaviors, and feelings of anxiety and disempowerment. Such difficulties lead to the finding that EFL migrants must be better accommodated when engaging in service transactions, with other, semiotically richer resources required to better aid their understanding and ease feelings of anxiety.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.21028.dry
2022-05-19
2024-12-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/aral.21028.dry
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arminen, I., & Weilenmann, A.
    (2008) Mobile presence and intimacy: Reshaping social actions in mobile contextual configuration. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1905–1923. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.016
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.016 [Google Scholar]
  2. Back, M., Han, M., & Weng, S. C. A.
    (2020) Emotional scaffolding for emergent multilingual learners through translanguaging: Case stories. Language and Education, 34(5), 387–406. 10.1080/09500782.2020.1744638
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2020.1744638 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bhatia, T. K.
    (2018) Accent, intelligibility, mental health, and trauma. World Englishes, 37, 421–431. 10.1111/weng.12329
     https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12329 [Google Scholar]
  4. Birney, M. E., Rabinovich, A., Morton, T. A., Heath, H., & Ashcroft, S.
    (2020) When speaking English is not enough: The consequences of language-based stigma for nonnative speakers. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 39(1), 67–86. 10.1177/0261927X19883906
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X19883906 [Google Scholar]
  5. Blackledge, A., & Creese, A.
    (2020) Interaction ritual and the body in a city meat market. Social Semiotics, 30(1), 1–24. 10.1080/10350330.2018.1521355
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2018.1521355 [Google Scholar]
  6. Blommaert, J., & Rampton, B.
    (2011) Language and superdiversity. Diversities, 13(2), 1–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bucholtz, M.
    (2011) Race and the re-embodied voice in Hollywood film. Language & Communication, 31, 255–265. 10.1016/j.langcom.2011.02.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2011.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K.
    (2016) Embodied sociolinguistics. InN. Coupland (Ed.), Sociolinguistics: Theoretical debates (pp.173–200). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107449787.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107449787.009 [Google Scholar]
  9. Canagarajah, S.
    (2013) Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203120293
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203120293 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2017) Translingual practice as spatial repertoires: Expanding the paradigm beyond structuralist orientations. Applied Linguistics, 39(1), 31–54. 10.1093/applin/amx041
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx041 [Google Scholar]
  11. Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J.
    (2014) The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547. 10.1188/14.ONF.545‑547
     https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547 [Google Scholar]
  12. De Costa, P. I.
    (2020) Linguistic racism: Its negative effects and why we need to contest it. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(7), 833–837. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1783638
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1783638 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dovchin, S.
    (2015) Language, multiple authenticities and social media: The online language practices of university students in Mongolia. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19(4), 437–459. 10.1111/josl.12134
     https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12134 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2019) Language crossing and linguistic racism: Mongolian immigrant women in Australia. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 14(4), 334–351. 10.1080/17447143.2019.1566345
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2019.1566345 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2020) The psychological damages of linguistic racism and international students in Australia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(7), 804–818. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1759504
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1759504 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dovchin, S., Pennycook, A., & Sultana, S.
    (2017) Popular culture, voice and linguistic diversity: Young adults on- and offline. Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Foo, A. L., & Tan, Y. Y.
    (2019) Linguistic insecurity and the linguistic ownership of English among Singaporean Chinese. World Englishes, 38, 606–629. 10.1111/weng.12359
     https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12359 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gumperz, J.
    (1992) Contextualization and understanding. InA. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp.229–252). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Holtgraves, T., & Paul, K.
    (2013) Texting versus talking: An exploration in telecommunication language. Telematics and Informatics, 30, 289–295. 10.1016/j.tele.2013.01.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2013.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  20. Izadi, D.
    (2017) Semiotic resources and mediational tools in Merrylands, Sydney, Australia: The case of Persian and Afghan shops. Social Semiotics, 27(4), 495–512. 10.1080/10350330.2017.1334401
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1334401 [Google Scholar]
  21. Karpiński, M.
    (2012) The boundaries of language: Dealing with paralinguistic features. Lingua Posnaniensis, 54(2), 37–54. 10.2478/v10122‑012‑0013‑1
     https://doi.org/10.2478/v10122-012-0013-1 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kusters, A., Spotti, M., Swanwick, R., & Tapio, E.
    (2017) Beyond languages, beyond modalities: Transforming the study of semiotic repertoires. International Journal of Multilingualism, 14(3), 219–232. 10.1080/14790718.2017.1321651
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2017.1321651 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lee, J. W., & Dovchin, S.
    (2020) Negotiating innovation and ordinariness. InJ. W. Lee & S. Dovchin (Eds.), Translinguistics: Negotiating innovation and ordinariness (pp.1–5). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Li, W.
    (2016) New Chinglish and the post-multilingualism challenge: Translanguaging ELF in China. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 5(1), 1–25. 10.1515/jelf‑2016‑0001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2016-0001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lippi-Green, R.
    (2012) English with an accent: Language, ideology and discrimination in the United States. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203348802
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203348802 [Google Scholar]
  26. Maybin, J., & Tusting, K.
    (2011) Linguistic ethnography. InJ. Simpson (Ed.), Routledge handbook of applied linguistics (pp.515–528). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. McNeill, D.
    (2005) Gesture and Thought. University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  28. Norris, S.
    (2004) Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203379493
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203379493 [Google Scholar]
  29. Pennycook, A.
    (2007) Global Englishes and transcultural flows. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. (2017) Translanguaging and semiotic assemblages. International Journal of Multilingualism, 14(3), 269–282. 10.1080/14790718.2017.1315810
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2017.1315810 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pennycook, A., & Otsuji, E.
    (2020) The mundanity of metrolingual practices. InJ. W. Lee & S. Dovchin (Eds.), Translinguistics: Negotiating innovation and ordinariness (pp.9–23). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Pink, S., Hjorth, L., Horst, H., Nettheim, J., & Bell, G.
    (2018) Digital work and play: Mobile technologies and new ways of feeling at home. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 21(1), 26–38. 10.1177/1367549417705602
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549417705602 [Google Scholar]
  33. Rosa, J.
    (2016) Standardization, racialization, languagelessness: Raciolinguistic ideologies across communicative contexts. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 26(2), 162–183. 10.1111/jola.12116
     https://doi.org/10.1111/jola.12116 [Google Scholar]
  34. Rossini, N.
    (2012) Reinterpreting Gesture as Language. IOS Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Schandorf, M.
    (2012) Mediated gesture: Paralinguistic communication and phatic text. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 19(3), 319–344. 10.1177/1354856512439501
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856512439501 [Google Scholar]
  36. Singer, J. B.
    (2009) Ethnography. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 191–98. 10.1177/107769900908600112
     https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900908600112 [Google Scholar]
  37. Starfield, S.
    (2015) Ethnographic research. InB. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource (pp.137–152). Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Sultana, S.
    (2019) Resources within the local-global interface of the virtual space: Critically aware youths in Bangladesh. InT. A. Barrett & S. Dovchin (Eds.), Critical inquiries in the sociolinguistics of globalization (pp.1–19). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781788922852‑004
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922852-004 [Google Scholar]
  39. Streeck, J.
    (2017) Self-making man: A day of action, life, and language. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139149341
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139149341 [Google Scholar]
  40. Thurlow, C., & Mroczek, K. R.
    (2011) Digital discourse: Language in the new media. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199795437.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199795437.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  41. Zhu, H., Otsuji, E., & Pennycook, A.
    (2017) Multilingual, multisensory and multimodal repertoires in corner shops, streets and markets: Introduction. Social Semiotics, 27(4), 383–393. 10.1080/10350330.2017.1334383
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1334383 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.21028.dry
Loading
Phones as a semiotic disadvantage
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 45, 219 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.21028.dry
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.21028.dry
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.21028.dry
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Australia; EFL migrants; linguistic superiority; paralinguistic insufficiency; phones; semiotics

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error