Linguistic hybridity and learner identity: translingual practice among plurilinguals in the educational setting

• Authors: Lankiewicz Hadrian Aleksander
• Conference: Interdyscyplinarność w glottodydaktyce – uczenie się języka obcego w perspektywie badawczej
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Capitalizing on the ecological approach to language learning (van Lier, 2004; Kramsch, 2008) and the conceptualization of language as a local practice (Pennycook, 2010) as well as languaging (Jørgensen, 2008), accounting for the continuity of linguistic phenomena rather than a discriminatory perception of linguistic properties, we intend to delve into the problem of linguistic hybridity as a sign of L2 learner identity. A direct inspiration for the study, as exemplified in the title, is the concept of metrolingualism (Otsuji, Pennycook, 2010), which offers a potential to be very informative for the study of identity issues inscribed in language. Metrolingualism connotes linguistic hybridity, which refers to something unnatural, untypical, not conforming to the norm. Positing the continuity of language use and symbolic competence (Kramsch, Whiteside, 2008), we assume after van Lier (2004) that language is not a fixed code but socially constructed entity which mingles with personal experiences shaped by social context and activates power-related issues in language use. The aim of the paper is to delve into discursive practices of students learning/using more than one L2 in the educational setting. An examination of their narratives and their languaging about language (Swain, 2006) discloses how they position themselves as L2 language users.

Keywords

EN

language identity; translingualism; metrolingualism; linguistic hybridity; ecolinguistics; foreign language learning

PL

tożsamość językowa; translingwalizm; metrolingwalizm; hybrydowość językowa; ekolingwistyka; nauka języków obcych

• Publisher: Polskie Towarzystwo Neofilologiczne
• Journal: Neofilolog
• Year: 2021
• Issue: 56/1
• Pages: 55-70

Dates

published

2021-03-31

Contributors

author

Lankiewicz Hadrian Aleksander

• University of Gdańsk

References

• Androutsopoulos J. (2013), Networked multilingualism: some language practices on Facebook and their implications. “International Journal of Bilingualism”, No 19(2), pp. 185 –205.
• Block D. (2003), The social turn in second language acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Brzezińska A. (2000), Społeczna psychologia rozwoju. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
• Canagarajah S. (2013), Translingual practice. Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. New York: Routledge.
• Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Companion Volume with New Descriptors. (2018), Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989 [DW 31.12.2019].
• Cook V. (1991), The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. “Second Language Research”, No 7, pp. 103–117.
• Driagina V., Pavlenko A. (2007), Identity repertoires in the narratives of advanced American learners of Russian, (in:) Hua Z., Seedhouse P., Li W., Cook V. (eds.), Language learning and teaching as social interaction. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 103-125.
• Fairclough N. (1989), Language and power. London and New York: Longman.
• Fairclough N. (1992), Critical language awareness. London and New York: Longman.
• Fairclough N. (1995), Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
• Firth A., Wagner J. (1997), On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SL. “Modern Language Journal”, No 81(3), pp. 285–300.
• García O., Li W. (2014), Translanguaging: language, bilingualism and education. New York: Polgrave Macmillan.
• García O., Leiva C. (2014), Theorizing and enacting translanguaging for social justice, (in:) Creese A., Blackledge A. (eds.), Heteroglossia as practice and pedagogy. New York: Springer, pp. 199–216.
• Halliday M. K. A., Hassan R. (1989), Language, context, and text: aspects of language in socio-semiotic perspective. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
• Harris R. (1981), The language myth. London: Duckworth.
• Harris R. (1996), Signs, language and communication. London: Routledge.
• Jørgensen N. (2008), Polylingual languaging around and among children and adolescents. “International Journal of Multilingualism”, No 5(3), pp. 161–176.
• Kramsch C. (2002), Introduction. ‘How can we tell the dancer form the dance? (in:) Kramsch C. (ed.), Language learning and language socialization. Ecological perspectives. London and New York: Continuum, pp. 1–30.
• Kramsch C. (2008), Ecological perspectives on foreign language education. “Language Teaching”, No 41(3), pp. 389–408.
• Kramsch C., Whiteside A. (2008), Language ecology in multilingual settings.Towards a theory of symbolic competence. “Applied Linguistics”, No 29(4), pp. 645–671.
• Lankiewicz H. (2014), From the concept of languaging to L2 language pedagogy, (in:) Lankiewicz H., Wąsikiewicz-Firlej E. (eds.), Languaging experiences: learning and teaching revisited. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 1–32.
• Lankiewicz H., Wąsikiewicz-Firlej E., Szczepaniak-Kozak A. (2016), Insights into language teacher awareness with reference to the concept of self-marginalization and empowerment in the use of a foreign language. “Porta Linguarum”, No 25, pp. 147–161.
• Li W. (2011), Moment analysis and translanguaging space: discursive construction of identities by multilingual Chinese youth in Britain. “Journal of Pragmatics”, No 43(5), pp. 1222–1235.
• Maher J. C. (2005), Metroethnicity, language, and the principle of cool. “International Journal of Sociology of Language”, No 175/176, pp. 83–102.
• Makoni S., Pennycook A. (2007), Disinventing and reconstituting languages, (in:) Makoni S., Pennycook A. (eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 1–41.
• Mazak C. M. (2017), Introduction: theorizing translanguaging practices in higher education, (in:) Mazak C. M., Carroll K. S. (eds.), Translanguaging in higher education: beyond monolingual ideologies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 1–10.
• Mazak C. M., Carroll K. S. (eds.) (2017), Translanguaging in higher education: Beyond monolingual ideologies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Morgan D. L. (1998), The focus group guidebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Morgan D. L. (1988), Focus group as qualitative research. London: Sage.
• Neisser U. (1988), Fife kinds of self-knowledge. “Philosophical Psychology”, No 1, pp. 35-59.
• Norton B. (2000), Identity and language learning: gender, ethnicity and educational change. Harlow, England: Longman/Pearson Education.
• Otsuji E., Pennycook A. (2010), Metrolingualism: fixity, fluidity and language in flux. “International Journal of Multilingualism”, No 7(3), pp. 240–254.
• Pavlenko A., Blackledge A. (eds.) (2004), Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
• Pavlenko A., Lantolf, J. (2001), Second language learning as participation and the reconstruction of selves, (in:) Lantolf J. (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 155–177.
• Pennycook A. (2010), Language as a local practice. London: Routledge.
• Swain M. (2006), Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency, (in:) Byrnes H. (ed.), Advanced language learning: the contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. New York: Continuum, pp. 95–108.
• van Lier L. (2004), The ecology and semiotics of language learning: a sociocultural perspective. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Varela F. J., Thompson E., Rosch E. (1991), The embodied mind: cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Identifiers

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/n.2021.56.1.5