No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Multilingualism with English
Abstract
The construct of Multilingualism with English has been acknowledged in the field of ELF and, to some extent, multilingualism in applied linguistics. Implying the encompassing position of multilingualism (Jenkins, 2015), the construct has come to refer to multilingual repertoires in which English takes one part. In this sense, it differs from cases of multilingualism in which English does not exist in ML repertoires. English in this construct, meanwhile, implies ELF by definition. However, this does not mean that native English speakers’ multilingualism is out of the scope of this definition, either. Interactions involving multilingual native and non-native speakers can be placed in this category, as well. Against this background, Multilingualism with English will be described in this entry through its ontology and epistemology, two major pillars of scientific inquiry.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Teaching English has traditionally been associated with a monolingual bias and the exclusive use of English in the classroom is highly recommended in different countries. Nowadays English is widely used to teach academic content and this strict separation of languages can be problematic because it prevents students from using resources they have previously acquired in other languages (Cenoz & Gorter, 2015; Kubota, 2018). In this article we discuss ‘pedagogical translanguaging’ understood as intentional instructional strategies that integrate two or more languages and aim at the development of the multilingual repertoire as well as metalinguistic and language awareness. Pedagogical translanguaging considers learners as emergent multilinguals who can use English and other languages depending on the social context. Their linguistic resources are valued and learners are not seen as deficient users of English but as multilingual speakers.
English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is a complex form of language contact, which is viewed from three key perspectives: the cognitive, the micro‐social /interactional, and the macro‐social. Each contributes crucially to the whole, and each frame has its own dynamics, while feeding into the other levels. Each operates in its particular time scale, resulting in multiple synchronous and asynchronous processes of change. As a contact language, ELF embodies second language use (SLU), which is distinct from Second Language Acquisition (SLA). We can expect ELF to have affinities with world Englishes (WE), and there are indications that ELF is closer to WE than to SLA. English as a Lingua Franca provides unique insights for understanding second languages, on account of its global diffusion and its multiplex contacts with other languages.
In the relatively few years since empirical research into English as a Lingua Franca began being conducted more widely, the field has developed and expanded remarkably, and in myriad ways. In particular, researchers have explored ELF from the perspective of a range of linguistic levels and in an ever-increasing number of sociolinguistic contexts, as well as its synergies with the field of Intercultural Communication and its meaning for the fields of Second Language Acquisition and English as a Foreign Language. The original orientation to ELF communication focused heavily, if not exclusively, on form. In light of increasing empirical evidence, this gave way some years later to an understanding that it is the processes underlying these forms that are paramount, and hence to a focus on ELF users and ELF as social practice. It is argued in this article, however, that ELF is in need of further retheorisation in respect of its essentially multilingual nature: a nature that has always been present in ELF theory and empirical work, but which, I believe, has not so far been sufficiently foregrounded. This article therefore attempts to redress the balance by taking ELF theorisation a small step further in its evolution.
This paper sets out theoretical approaches to language that guide the authors’ research in the field, but which have been under-represented in literature. As the English as a lingua franca field of enquiry grows, this article provides needed dialogue, consideration, and reflection over how we conceptualise our subject matter, our roles, and our rhetorical stances. This paper proposes the usefulness of considering the complexity of language, not as something that gets in the way of empiricism or clarity, but as something that makes ELF researchers perfectly positioned to investigate and contribute to wider understandings of language. Complexity theory is drawn upon as a conceptual tool that can be useful in guiding our thinking about the dynamic nature of language, which, in turn, is considered in relation to the reasons why language is complex, namely its roles in relation to practices and contextualisation. Having established our approaches to the complexity of the language in ELF scenarios, we propose implications for ELF researchers’ treatment of speakers, language, and ideology.
Sowden’s article raises a number of questions concerning English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and criticizes it as a simplified
and culturally neutral means of communication. In this response, I address the issues concerning the conceptualization and
use of ELF as well as the implications for ELT. I provide up-to-date evidence of ELF research and show the variability, richness,
and creativity of ELF communication.
From the perspective of the speakers themselves, this is the first book to explore attitudes towards ELF in general and ELF accents in particular, their effects on ELF speakers' identities, and ways in which the problems can be addressed in teacher education, English language testing, and ELT materials.
This paper aims to show that the development of multilingualism in the world has reached a point where, in terms of scale and significance, it is comparable with and assimilable to politico-economic aspects of globalisation, global mobility and ‘postmodern’ modes of thinking. The paper situates multilingualism in its relationship with the most dramatic social changes currently occurring in the world, notably the transformation of the experience of time and space, as well as global mobility, which has resulted in unprecedented diversity and heterogeneity in the populations of individual countries and regions. It argues that multilingualism is the ineluctable concomitant of all dimensions of globalisation and that the application in the relevant literature of the notion of a new linguistic dispensation to recent shifts in the language/society interface is entirely justified by the facts. Finally, taking an historical perspective, it seeks to make a case for the claim that, although multilingual individuals and societies have existed throughout the history of humankind, the present stage of global sociolinguistic arrangements is in fact a novel development.
In this article, we analyze the relationship between studies in second language acquisition and studies in bilingualism as areas that have been traditionally ignored but which share some common perspectives. Then we look at new trends in both areas that are compatible with a holistic perspective in the study of multilingualism. Based on these trends, we propose “Focus on Multilingualism,” an approach that looks at the whole linguistic repertoire of multilingual speakers and language learners and at the relationships between the languages when conducting research, teaching, or assessing different languages. In the second part of the article, we report on the results of an exploratory study on the development of writing skills in three languages: Basque, Spanish, and English. We explore different ways to look at the three languages and their interaction by focusing on the multilingual speaker and his or her languages rather than each of the specific languages in isolation. The results indicate that the languages are related to each other in different ways and that multilingual speakers develop their creativity in these language practices. We argue that by focusing on the different languages, we can gain new insights about the way languages are learned and used.
The origin of the term ‘lingua franca’ is unclear. According to Ostler (2010, p. 7), lingua franca “seems to be a retranslation of some Eastern-Mediterranean term for ‘language of the Franks’”. Ostler also notes (2010, p. 4) the “original ‘Lingua Franca’ was once a particular language … the common contact language of the Eastern-Mediterranean in the first half of the second millennium, the pidgin Italian in which Greeks and Turks could talk to Frenchmen and Italians”. He defines a lingua franca as a “contact language used for communication among people who do not share a mother tongue” (2010, p. 36). Seidlhofer points out that the term has Latin roots meaning something like ‘free language’. “It is thus not fanciful to think of ‘Lingua Franca’ as ‘free language’ … a means of intercultural communication not particular to countries and ethnicities, a linguistic resource that is not contained in, or constrained by traditional (and notoriously tendentious) ideas of what constitutes a ‘language’” (2011, p. 81).
What has strained the relations between the fields of world Englishes and Second Language Acquisition (SLA), denounced by Sridhar and Sridhar (1986; Sridhar, 1994) and felt by many others during these past 30 years? I first characterize a number of the differences in disciplinary goals and orientations that have contributed to the tensions. I then argue that it is ultimately differences in the ontologies of language that are the largest hurdle to establishing synergies between the two fields. I weigh what has been gained and lost in SLA by the unquestioned adoption of essentialist ontologies and argue that it has locked SLA research into a monolingual worldview that the field can no longer afford. I also call for the continuation of research that illuminates multilingual success but also addresses the phenomenological and emic reality of the ‘native’ and ‘nonnative’ dichotomy, as many multilinguals experience their ‘nonnativeness’ as oppression that they must constantly manage and negotiate under the hegemony of monolingual ideologies. I close with four recommendations for changes in SLA that might help a new future where WE and SLA mutually benefit from their disciplinary achievements.
Despite the good reasons why WE and SLA ought to be establishing a dialogue with one another, this has yet to be the case in any substantive manner. This paper argues that a fundamental issue that needs to be addressed if the gap between world Englishes (WE) and Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is to be bridged is ‘the linguistic system conundrum’, or how references to distinct L1s and L2s (common in SLA) can be coherently related to sociolinguistic claims (increasingly common in WE) about the porosity of language categories. I suggest, by drawing on Deleuze's notion of an ‘assemblage’ (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987), how the conundrum can be resolved in a way that: (i) preserves the insights gleaned from SLA and WE; as well as (ii) opens up pathways for greater dialogue and common research.
This article examines certain aspects of the debate surrounding English as a Lingua Franca (ELF). It argues that in some ways,
neither ELF nor its opponents have come to terms with the complexities of English in a globalized world. By defining ELF according
to how it differs from native-speaker language use, ELF researchers have tended to essentialize and exaggerate these differences,
creating a false dichotomy between ‘ELF’ and ‘non-ELF’. At the same time, the conservatism of language teaching and testing
in many parts of the world also suggests that there is further scope for an enhanced awareness of language variation. A desirable
outcome of the debate would be the realization that all language use—whether by native or non-native speakers—is variable,
emergent, contextual, and subject to hybridity and change.
In an effort to curtail native-speaker dominance of global English, and in recognition of the growing role of the language
among non-native speakers from different first-language backgrounds, some academics have been urging the teaching of English
as a Lingua Franca (ELF). Although at first this proposal seems to offer a plausible alternative to the traditional standard
version, it raises both practical and theoretical concerns. Moreover, since neither World English nor nativized local Englishes
have yet gained full legitimacy, it is clear that the native-speaker model still has an important role to play, though one
modified by new cultural and pedagogical priorities.
Firth and Wagner (1997) questioned the dichotomies nonnative versus native speaker, learner versus user, and interlanguage versus target language, which reflect a bias toward innateness, cognition, and form in language acquisition. Research on lingua franca English (LFE) not only affirms this questioning, but reveals what multilingual communities have known all along: Language learning and use succeed through performance strategies, situational resources, and social negotiations in fluid communicative contexts. Proficiency is therefore practice-based, adaptive, and emergent. These findings compel us to theorize language acquisition as multimodal, multisensory, multilateral, and, therefore, multidimensional. The previously dominant constructs such as form, cognition, and the individual are not ignored; they get redefined as hybrid, fluid, and situated in a more socially embedded, ecologically sensitive, and interactionally open model.
This article examines the ontology of language from a historico-cultural perspective. Acknowledging the importance of pre-ontological assumptions for setting the epistemic parameters within which scientific disciplines operate, the article discusses the elements of a methodological framework for theorising such assumptions, based upon Foucault’s conception of ‘historical ontology’ [Foucault, M., 1991. In: Rabinow, P. (Ed.), The Foucault Reader. Penguin, London]. By using a genealogical method that analyses ontological beliefs as they occur within their historical and cultural context, it is suggested that it is possible to narrow in on what is “singular, contingent and arbitrary” (p. 45) in any specific conceptualisation of language, and use this information as an important variable in the self-reflexive analysis of linguistic research.
The spread of English and the growth of multilingualism with English in Europe
- C Hoffmann
Hoffmann, C. (2000). The spread of English and the growth of multilingualism with English
in Europe. In J. Cenoz & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third
language (pp. 1-21). Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters.
She's mixing the two languages together": forms and functions of code-Switching in English as a lingua franca
- T Klimpfinger
Klimpfinger, T. (2009). "She's mixing the two languages together": forms and functions of
code-Switching in English as a lingua franca. In A. Mauranen & E. Ranta (Eds.), English as
a lingua franca. Studies and findings (pp. 348-71). Cambridge, England: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education
- S May
May, S. (2014). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education.
New York, NY: Routledge.
The Cambridge handbook of world Englishes (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- Schneider
Schneider (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of world Englishes (Cambridge Handbooks in
Language and Linguistics, pp. 459-83). Cambridge University Press.