No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Case Study One: Reflexivity, Voice and Representation in Linguistic Ethnography
... Various authors (e.g. Creese 2015, Hornberger 2006) draw attention to the fact that the degree of agency and the nature of decision-making throughout the research process are sometimes erased from the final results. Linguistic ethnographers have exercised reflexivity in all these areas either as individual researchers or when working in a team. ...
... Finally, they addressed ethical issues (2016). A complete case study on team research and the reflexivity practice demanded throughout the process of reconstructing and representing participants' voices is found in Creese (2015). ...
Introduction and definitions This chapter addresses reflexivity as a central aspect of research in the situated study of language, a stance taken by linguistic ethnography (LE) and shared with other perspectives on communication, such as linguistic anthropology (Duranti 1997) and critical sociolinguistics (Heller 1996/2006, Martín Rojo 2010). Broadly speaking, "ethnography aims to describe the sometimes chaotic, contradictory, polymorph character of human behaviour in concrete settings" (Blommaert 2007). Since researchers are likely to follow threads, tie them together, categorise and identify patterns, and bring their own particular perspective against a background of previous research in the area to the table, such indeterminacy finds some order
... This can sometimes be predicted, prepared for and in some way mitigated by employing co-investigators, participatory methods, interpreters, translators and/or cultural mediators. Indeed, there exists a plethora of helpful recommendations by experienced colleagues that pave the way for ethically responsible, linguistically representative and rigorous research, and which encourage engagement with multilingual methodologies (see for example, Andrews et al. 2019;Blackledge and Creese 2010;Byrd-Clark and Roy 2022;Creese 2015). ...
Researching in heterogeneous communities can present challenges for the most experienced of researchers, especially in the context of ethnographic work, where the dynamism and unpredictability of a research setting can make it difficult to anticipate the languages spoken. Drawing on data from multilingual health consultations, I reflect on incidents where language(s) extend beyond the scope of my repertoire and inhibit the immediacy of inference. Ensuing collaborative processes of translation, transcription and analysis offer opportunities to illuminate (mis)understanding(s), but also demonstrate how additional contributions can complexify and shape what can be understood as ‘interpretation’. In documenting some of the practical and ethical considerations that emerge during the research journey, I explore the experience of developing capabilities to cope with communicative opacity and (un)expected tensions. I conclude with some tentative recommendations for institutions seeking to support doctoral students embarking on fieldwork in diverse settings.
... Over the past decade there has been a growing interest in reflexivity and researcher positionality in applied linguistics (Attia & Edge, 2017;Creese, 2015;Edge, 2011;Ganassin & Holmes, 2020;Mann, 2016). This book contributes to this growing body of work, but it is also distinctive in that it emphasises the practical application of reflexivity at all stages of research. ...
... Over the past decade there has been a growing interest in reflexivity and researcher positionality in applied linguistics (Attia & Edge, 2017;Creese, 2015;Edge, 2011;Ganassin & Holmes, 2020;Mann, 2016). This book contributes to this growing body of work, but it is also distinctive in that it emphasises the practical application of reflexivity at all stages of research. ...
The motivation for this research was to explore the relationship between linguistic repertoires and complex identities of young people attending a complementary language school in a multilingual city. The research design was influenced by linguistic ethnography (LE) and the context of a complementary school. Research was conducted in a German Saturday school, over a period of six months, using observations, language portrait work and semi-structured interviews with five young people and their teacher. I further gathered contextual data such as the background of students currently attending the school and wrote a research diary. All data were transcribed and analysed using a combination of post-structural discourse analysis and thematic analysis (PDTA). The findings highlighted the complexities of young people’s identities in relation to their organic linguistic repertoires (OLR). The term OLR points toward the dynamic nature of ‘languages’ that appear less visible in the term language repertoire or plurilingualism.
The findings of this study suggest that young people’s language practices can be associated with linguistic identity, and where a variety of discourses are at play in complementary schools as sheltered spaces, thereby shaping young people’s identity development. The study further suggests an alteration of students’ identity development throughout the study and their increased awareness of their OLR was a result of the language portrait activity. I demonstrate how the relationship among different languages, language varieties, accents and dialects in a young person’s OLR are related to classroom performances and how the young people cross linguistic boundaries. The study is also unique in attending to everyday language practices, through a linguistic ethnographic lens, of young people attending a German Saturday school in the context of complementary schooling in the UK. In addition, focusing on young people in an A-level classroom depicts a much-understudied group and further sheds light on the similarities between students in these settings and perhaps other complementary schools.
Linguistic ethnography provides insight into how communication occurs between individuals and institutions, while situating these local actions within wider social, political and historical contexts (Copland & Creese, 2015) and has proven to be a particularly effective tool for developing our understanding of individuals’ lived multilingual realities (see Unamuno, 2014) and societal multilingualism. Turning the ‘reflexive gaze’ that is central to ethnography (Clifford & Marcus, 1986) back onto linguistic ethnography itself, we argue that where complex multilingual interactions are the object of study, more attention must be given to how multilingualism affects each aspect of the process of actually doing linguistic ethnography. In this paper we outline the development of three principles that we put forward as being essential in developing and conducting contemporary linguistic ethnography in multilingual settings. The principles are: 1) Researching multilingually; 2) Researching collaboratively; and 3) Researching responsively.
There is a need for detailed and localised analyses of the management, role, and understanding of risk (Zinn 2017). Yet the organisational discourse and practices of African organisations working in the field of emerging infectious diseases remain largely unexplored. An improved understanding of the discursive patterns of African health organisations may lead to a more holistic understanding of the communicative processes of risk management crucial to effective outbreak response and preparedness. The present study explores how members of a pan-African health consortium draws on intersubjective practices to navigate the socio-cultural and professional intricacies they face locally and internationally.
The study adopts a linguistic ethnography framework. The gathered data are comprised of ethnographic observations, interviews, documents, and recordings of organisational meetings, conference presentations, and public interviews. An investigation of social co- presence (Kang et al. 2008) and rapport (Spencer-Oatey 2005) in internal meetings shows how the professionally diverse and geographically dispersed members are able to ensure effective collaboration. Drawing on Bucholtz and Hall’s (2004) analytical framework for identity construction, the study explores how an organisational risk expert identity is locally constructed. Through the Appraisal Theory framework (Martin and White 2005), the analysis reveals how the members position their work nationally and internationally.
The findings are both substantive and methodological. The members establish similarity and difference between themselves, the local people, and established authorities. They foster internal, local and international collaboration and cohesiveness to authenticate their risk expert identity and local embeddedness, while at the same time establishing difference, space, and appositeness for their work. The organisation positions itself as an intermediary African risk expert voice strategically aligning itself with both hegemonic authorities and the local population. The study demonstrates how to systematically map an organisation’s discursively constructed dynamic and multidimensional identity through the semiotic processes of practice, indexicality, ideology, and performance, and tactics of intersubjectivity (Bucholtz and Hall 2004). Additionally, it pioneers the use of the Appraisal Theory framework to identify the stance-taking practices constructing an organisational stance signature (Johnstone 2009). This linguistic ethnographic enquiry sets a precedent for future collaborative and mutually supportive academic explorations and partnerships of this kind between the Global South and North.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.