Australian Review of Applied Linguistics - Volume 30, Issue 1, 2007

Language is crucial in our lives and to all disciplines. It affects our well-being individually and collectively and touches important sociopolitical issues. Linguists/applied linguists have exciting opportunities for interdisciplinary research and to work in contexts personally meaningful to them. While language is the concern of all people, professionals have special responsibilities to provide leadership in understanding how it works and responsible insights into the uses and abuses of language in society.

Australian language specialists can offer the rest of the world experience with language policy, typological and language contact studies, and bilingual language acquisition. Some Australians have advanced linguistic knowledge through studies of indigenous languages. Many have worked with indigenous, ethnic and other communities and professional groups, providing evidence in court or advice to teachers and families. Some broadcast regularly or occasionally. But have we succeeded in contesting the monolingual mindset of the mainstream? The Australian authors represented in language sections of most general bookshops are not linguists.

Far more collaboration and coordination of initiatives through the professional societies is needed to put languages back on the national agenda and make Australia more language-aware. This should lead to recognizing, valuing, fostering and transmitting, supporting and sharing our linguistic diversity. Australia’s rich language potential has only been partly realized.

The internationalisation of education has become a major focus of international, national and institutional attention, reflected in a substantial and expanding literature on how internationalisation is manifested, how it might be promoted, its implications for areas such as government policy, strategic planning and management, educational quality, student mobility, teaching and learning, and the place of language and culture in teaching and learning. There is also general agreement in the literature on the need for internationalisation to include an ‘intercultural dimension’.

In this paper, we examine how we are to understand the ‘intercultural dimension’ in higher education. Our approach is based on an analysis of current constructions of this dimension, to argue that these constructions are neither individually nor in combination capable of meeting the challenge of internationalisation. Drawing on recent studies undertaken at the University of South Australia, we propose culture as ‘intercultural’ as an alternative construction.

This paper examines the patterns of language choice and the construction of L2 learning opportunities in foreign language learners’ social networks by focusing on how these patterns and opportunities are socially structured in a Japanese language learner’s natural interactions. It is based on a range of data, including a script of on-line chat occurring in natural environments as well interview data. Drawing on Cummins’ (1996) concept of interpersonal space, the findings indicate that there were a number of social and contextual factors that seemed to affect the learner’s language choice and L2 learning opportunities in complex ways. Most of these factors appeared to be related to the learner’s and/or his network interactants’ identity as an adequate L2 user and their perception of each other’s L2 proficiency and/or role. This paper provides insights into how to create environments that promote the learners’ opportunities for L2 use and learning.

Languages education, or what has been called the study of languages other than English (LOTE), seems to involve a paradox in Australia. It is supposed to promote cultural enrichment and intercultural understanding, and yet the process of becoming a qualified language teacher tends to be intolerant of the cultural differences of overseas born and educated speakers of these languages. This is clear from an increasing body of literature on the difficulties experienced by overseas educated language teachers, which we review in the first half of this paper. Since this raises questions on how such teachers survive in Australia, we then present an introspective study of the experiences of the first author, including the circumstances that brought her to Australia, the difficulties she faced in teacher training and as a newly employed teacher, and the factors that enabled her to cope and eventually succeed. Her experiences highlight the particular importance of supportive supervisors and colleagues, thus suggesting a valuable role for mentoring.

Primary school languages education continues to be a challenging issue for all states in Australia. In Victoria, LOTE study is provided at the primary level to address the needs of linguistically diverse communities, as well as to provide an enriching learning experience for monolingual speakers of English. The challenge remains to ensure that programs that are run are effective, address the needs of the community and are embraced as a valuable and enriching component of the school curriculum. This study looks at the provision of LOTE in 2003 in Victorian primary schools and in particular, through an analysis of the geographical location of community groups and primary LOTE programs, how effectively community needs are being met. We also analyse the nature of LOTE programs through an examination of teachers’ qualifications, time allotment and program type. Factors identified by some schools as impinging on LOTE study at the primary level, such as literacy concerns and multilingual diversity, will also be examined.

The introduction and spread of Ms as the courtesy address title for women is a cornerstone of feminist linguistic planning for English. Its introduction aimed to eradicate the discriminatory inequity in the address system that exposed women through their (non)marital relationship with men. The understanding, use and impact of the courtesy title are fairly well documented, particularly for Englishes of Australia (e.g. Pauwels 1987; 1998; 2001; 2003), US and Britain (Romaine 2001) and New Zealand (Holmes 2001). We have little knowledge of the form’s spread, impact and use by speakers for whom English is not the dominant language but forms part of their linguistic repertoire. Graddol (1997) argues that English-speaking bilinguals will outnumber first language speakers and, ‘increasingly will decide the global future of the language’ (p.10). Such contexts of English – second / third / foreign – usage loosely align with locales Kachru (1997) identified as ‘expanding circles’, and to some extent, many of the ‘outer circle’ Englishes, e.g. Hong Kong. In this paper we take up a new direction in feminist language planning: the exploration of courtesy title use and practices by English-speaking mono-/bi-/multilingual women around the world. We draw upon online survey data (available from http://www.teagirl.arts.uwa.edu.au/) to probe respondents’ strategies for addressing unknown women, as well as women’s use of courtesy titles for themselves. Our mapping of practices associated with Ms reveals an unexpected pattern of diffusion with implications for evaluating planned social language change. In relation to Ms, the implementation of feminist linguistic policy does not cohere with a pattern of spread from inner to outer to expanding ‘circles’ of English or from ‘first language speaker’ to … ‘foreign language speaker’ diffusion. The locale and personal contexts associated with education, awareness and personal commitment to gender equity interact in complicating, and surprising ways. Indeed our research exposes a new directionality for Ms as a preferred form for unknown women, without necessarily implicating its use in self-naming for many bilingual women resident in ‘outer circle’ locales.

Classroom discourse analysis has contributed to understandings of the nature of student-teacher interactions, and how learning takes place in the classroom; however, much of this work has been undertaken in teacher-directed learning contexts. Student-centred classrooms such as problem-based learning (PBL) approaches are increasingly common in professional disciplines such as the health sciences and medicine. With the globalisation of education, health science and medical education, PBL classrooms are often sites of considerable linguistic and cultural diversity, yet little is known from a classroom discourse perspective about the language demands of PBL. This paper examines the ways in which the students and tutor negotiate and construct meanings through language in one first year physiotherapy PBL tutorial at an Australian university, with a particular focus on the ways in which the discourse is regulated in a student-centred learning environment. The analysis of the classroom discourse is underpinned by Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics. The findings provide a description of the linguistic resources students draw on to co-construct and negotiate knowledge, as well as show how the tutor, with minimal strategic interventions, scaffolds the students’ learning. The findings also suggest that the PBL environment can be a challenging one for students whose cultural and language backgrounds are different from that of the classroom.