1887
Volume 1, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2543-3164
  • E-ISSN: 2543-3156
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In this article I address the fact that influential strands in socio- and applied linguistics advocate heteroglossic policies in education and other monolingually organised domains without extending this heteroglossia to public debate about language policy. Often this occurs by presenting linguistic diversity to relevant stakeholders as natural and real, or as the only option on account of its proven effectiveness. I argue that this strategy removes options from the debate by framing it as a scientific rather than political one, that it confronts stakeholders with academic pressure and blame, and that this may diminish scholars’ impact on policy making. Using examples from research on translanguaging, repertoires, and linguistic citizenship, I will suggest that scholars may be more effective in contexts of value conflict when their knowledge serves to expand rather than reduce the range of alternatives for stakeholders. Focusing on education I will then explore how we may reclaim language policy from an evidence-based discourse and address matters of value besides matters of fact.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lcs.00005.jas
2019-04-12
2019-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bakhtin, M.
    (1981) The dialogical imagination (ed. byM. Holquist). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bauman, R., & Briggs, C.
    (2003) Voices of modernity. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511486647
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486647 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bezemer, J.
    (2015) Partnerships in research. InJ. Snell, S. Shaw, & F. Copland (Eds.), Linguistic ethnography (pp.207–224). Basingstoke: Palgrave. 10.1057/9781137035035_11
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137035035_11 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bell, A., & Coupland, N.
    (2001) Dialogue. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 575. 10.1111/1467‑9481.00166
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00166 [Google Scholar]
  5. Biesta, G.
    (2009) Good education in an age of measurement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 33–46. 10.1007/s11092‑008‑9064‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9 [Google Scholar]
  6. (2010) Why ‘what works’ still won’t work. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29: 491–503. 10.1007/s11217‑010‑9191‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-010-9191-x [Google Scholar]
  7. (2012) Giving teaching back to education. Phenomenology and Practice, 6(2), 35–49. 10.29173/pandpr19860
    https://doi.org/10.29173/pandpr19860 [Google Scholar]
  8. Biesta, G., & Osberg, D.
    (2010) Complexity, education and politics from the inside-out and the outside-in. InD. Osberg & G. Biesta (Eds.), Complexity theory and the politics of education (pp.1–3). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Billig, M.
    (1996) Arguing and thinking. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A.
    (1988) Ideological dilemmas. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Block, D.
    (2018) The political economy of language education research (or the lack thereof). Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 15(4), 237–257. 10.1080/15427587.2018.1466300
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2018.1466300 [Google Scholar]
  12. Blommaert, J.
    (1999) The debate is open. InJ. Blommaert (Ed.), Language ideological debates (pp.1–38). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Blommaert, J., & Backus, A.
    (2011) Repertoires revisited. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, 67.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Bruce Morton, J., & Harper, S. N.
    (2007) What did Simon say? Revisiting the bilingual advantage. Developmental Science, 10(6), 719–726. 10.1111/j.1467‑7687.2007.00623.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00623.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C.
    (1977) Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cameron, D.
    (2012) Verbal hygiene (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203123898
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203123898 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cameron, D., Frazer, E., Harvey, P., Rampton, B., & Richardson, K.
    (1992) Researching language. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chun, E., & Lo, A.
    (2016) Language and racialization. InN. Bonvillain (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of linguistic anthropology (pp.220–233). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Cooke, M., Bryers, D., & Wistanley, B.
    (2018) ‘Our languages’. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, 234.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. De Bruin, A., Treccani, B., & Della Sala, S.
    (2014) Cognitive advantage in bilingualism: An example of publication bias?Psychological Science, 26(1), 99–107. 10.1177/0956797614557866
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614557866 [Google Scholar]
  21. Del Percio, A., Flubacher, M., & Duchêne, A.
    (2016) Language and political economy. InO. García, N. Flores, & M. Spotti (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language and society (pp.55–76). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Erickson, F.
    (1987) Transformation and school success. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18(4), 335–356. 10.1525/aeq.1987.18.4.04x0023w
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1987.18.4.04x0023w [Google Scholar]
  23. Flores, N.
    (2017) Developing a materialist anti-racist approach to language activism. Multilingua, 36(5), 565–570. 10.1515/multi‑2017‑3045
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2017-3045 [Google Scholar]
  24. García, O., & Flores, N.
    (2012) Multilingual pedagogies. InM. Martin-Jones, A. Blackledge, & A. Creese (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of multilingualism (pp.232–246). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. García, O., & Hesson, S.
    (2015) Translanguaging frameworks. InA. Yiakoumetti (Ed.), Multilingualism and language in education (pp.221–241). Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. García, O., & Li, W.
    (2014) Translanguaging. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137385765
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137385765 [Google Scholar]
  27. García, O., & Lin, A.
    (2016) Translanguaging and bilingual education. InO. García, A. Lin, S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education (pp.117–130). Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑02324‑3_9‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02324-3_9-1 [Google Scholar]
  28. Garcia, O., Flores, N., & Woodley, H. H.
    (2015) Constructing in-between spaces to ‘do’ bilingualism. InJ. Cenoz & D. Gorter (Eds.), Multilingual education (pp.199–224). Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gardiner, M.
    (2004) Wild publics and grotesque symposiums. The Sociological Review52(1), 28–48. 10.1111/j.1467‑954X.2004.00472.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2004.00472.x [Google Scholar]
  30. Hammersley, M.
    (2005) Is the evidence-based practice movement doing more good than harm?Evidence & Policy1(1), 85–100. 10.1332/1744264052703203
    https://doi.org/10.1332/1744264052703203 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2014) The perils of ‘impact’ for academic social science. Contemporary Social Science9(3), 345–355. 10.1080/21582041.2014.923580
    https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2014.923580 [Google Scholar]
  32. Heller, M.
    (1999) Ebonics, language revival, la qualité de la langue and more. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 3(2), 260–266. 10.1111/1467‑9481.00075
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00075 [Google Scholar]
  33. Heller, M., Pietikäinen, S., & Pujolar, J.
    (2017) Critical sociolinguistic research methods. New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315739656
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739656 [Google Scholar]
  34. Heller, M., & McElhinny, B.
    (2017) Language, capitalism, colonialism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Hill, J. H., & Hill, K. C.
    (1980) Mixed grammar, purist grammar, and language attitudes in modern Nahuatl. Language in Society, 9(3), 321–48. 10.1017/S0047404500008241
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500008241 [Google Scholar]
  36. Hogan-Brun, G., Mar-Molinero, C., & Stevenson, P.
    (Eds.) (2009) Discourses on language and integration. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.33
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.33 [Google Scholar]
  37. Jaffe, A.
    (1999) Ideologies in action. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110801064
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110801064 [Google Scholar]
  38. (2012) Collaborative practice, linguistic anthropological enquiry and mediation between researcher and practitioner discourses. InS. Gardner & M. Martin-Jones (Eds.), Multilingualism, discourse and ethnography (pp.334–352). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Jaspers, J.
    (2016) (Dis)fluency. Annual Review of Anthropology, 45, 147–162. 10.1146/annurev‑anthro‑102215‑100116
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102215-100116 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2018) The transformative limits of translanguaging. Language & Communication, 58(1), 1–10. 10.1016/j.langcom.2017.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2017.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  41. Jaspers, J., & Van Hoof, S.
    (2013) Hyperstandardization in Flanders. Extreme enregisterment and its aftermath. Pragmatics, 23(2), 331–359. 10.1075/prag.23.2.06jas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.23.2.06jas [Google Scholar]
  42. Kompridis, N.
    (2005) Normativizing hybridity/neutralizing culture. Political Theory, 33(3), 318–343. 10.1177/0090591705274867
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591705274867 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lefstein, A., & Snell, J.
    (2011) Professional vision and the politics of teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 505–514. 10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.004 [Google Scholar]
  44. Lewis, M. C.
    (2018) A critique of the principle of error correction as a theory of social change. Language in Society, 47, 325–384. 10.1017/S0047404518000258
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404518000258 [Google Scholar]
  45. Li, Wei
    (2016) Epilogue. InV. Cook & W. Li (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multicompetence (pp.533–543). Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Longino, H.
    (2002) The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Masschelein, J., & Simons, M.
    (2013) Defence of the school. Leuven: E-ducation, Culture and Society Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. McNamara, T.
    (2009) Language tests and social policy. InG. Hogan-Brun, C. Mar-Molinero, & P. Stevenson (Eds.), Discourses on language and integration (pp.153–163). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.33.12nam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.33.12nam [Google Scholar]
  49. Moore, R.
    (2007) The sociology of knowledge and education. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Otheguy, R., García, O., & Reid, W.
    (2015) Clarifying translanguaging and deconstructing named languages. Applied Linguistics Review, 6(3), 281–307. 10.1515/applirev‑2015‑0014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2015-0014 [Google Scholar]
  51. Pielke, R. A.
    (2007) The honest broker. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511818110
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818110 [Google Scholar]
  52. Rampton, B.
    (1997) Retuning in applied linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 3–25. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.1997.tb00101.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1997.tb00101.x [Google Scholar]
  53. Rampton, B., Cooke, M., & Holmes, S.
    (2018) Promoting linguistic citizenship. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, 233.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Salö, L.
    (2017) Sociolinguistics and epistemic reflexivity. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, 206.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Silverstein, M.
    (1985) Language and the culture of gender. InE. Mertz & R. J. Parmentier (Eds.), Semiotic mediation (pp.219–259). New York, NY: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑491280‑9.50016‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-491280-9.50016-9 [Google Scholar]
  56. Stevens, A.
    (2007) Survival of the ideas that fit. Social Policy & Society, 6(1), 25–35. 10.1017/S1474746406003319
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746406003319 [Google Scholar]
  57. Stroud, C.
    (2001) African mother-tongue programmes and the politics of language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 22(4), 339–355. 10.1080/01434630108666440
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630108666440 [Google Scholar]
  58. Stroud, C., & Heugh, K.
    (2004) Linguistic human rights and linguistic citizenship. InD. Patrick & J. Freeland (Eds.), Language rights and language survival (pp.191–218). Manchester: St Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Woolard, K. A.
    (1989) Double talk. Bilingualism and the politics of ethnicity in Catalonia. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Wynne, B.
    (1993) Public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science, 2, 321–337. 10.1088/0963‑6625/2/4/003
    https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/2/4/003 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lcs.00005.jas
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): authority , heteroglossia , linguistic citizenship , morality , repertoire and translanguaging
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