languaging and education garcia

8/3/2019 Languaging And Education Garcia

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/languaging-and-education-garcia 1/21

2

Languagingand Education

A Child's LanguagcUsc: A Sccnario

Follow 4-ye:rr-oldTatyirna rs he c<lnrputcrs turncclon. Thc wcb-basccl ro-

gramTatyanauses rr s r clrop-clownlrenunrrrking t 1'rossible<lswitch between

th eUkrainian n which her schoolinii s crlrrcluctccl,hc l lussirrrr er frrthcr peaks

to her,and the Frencl r hc wrrnts o lerrrn.Ancl whcn fhe cot t rputcr 's t icro-

phones turnecl n, Trr tyrrnrrv id ly isterrs<l hc cl i f ierent o iccsof thc tnany

gameshat areavai l r rb lc,n Ukrain i r r t t ,l .ussi r t t r ,rcnch, tngl ish, r r t t tyothcr

language he fancics. Wetch thc scrccn rrs the chilcl scrrcls rcss,rges ack

and orth,wi th mul t ip lcsigns,worcls, r rc l isLrrr lsor .nbin i l rgo conmrur l rcate

effectively i th th e nrany participants () n thc othcr encl,s<lnrctin'rcscitrby,

butmanyother i rnes , rr r rwrry.

Now listen to Tatyanrr rrs shc spcaks to hcr othcr tccnirgc sisters.Th c

Ukrainian heusess very differerrt rorn that which shc spcakswith her trtothcr

or th e Russianwhich s hc spc,rks o her fathcr. ' l 'hc langurrgc hc hcrrrson

television nd radio depenclson who in tlrc hornc is holcling th c renrote

control. ifferent hannels ftcn bring othcr languagcs, the vrrrictics, rs he

charactershange rom professionrrlo w<lrl<ing-class,rorn rich to poor, frrlnr

adultso children,and as pr()grilnrs riginrtc irr different gcograpl'rical rerrs

for specific opulations.

No w enterTatyana'sschool, but stol-rat the playground. There yo u sc c

of the same language-backgnrundnteract ing,s()met imes oing,

an d forth from languagepracticesof play ancl friendship to those of

Other t imes, children of cliffcrent lrrnguagebackgrounclsar e- playing, alking, engaging n langr-rageracticesas they relatc t<r

Peers.

walkftiends

into a classroom. atyan:r,who was chatting comfortably within th e playground, s now sitt ing cluietlyalt a desk. Sometimes,



22 tsilinsudlism and Education

the teachercalls or group work an d Tatyana s :rsked o completea task with

classmates.Bu t th e task is directed, tl-re anguage s controlled, an d only

"accountablealk" r on the subiect l f the esson nd in the standard anguage

of instruction at the particular tirne is allowed by the teacher.

If Tatyana is lucky, sh e s in a bil ingual classroom,bu t even here she'sno t

allowed to Llsehe r multiple languagepractices o cclmpleteschclol asks' to

communicate with ()thers, to think clearrly, o show th e understandings

acquired, he krrowledge ntcrnalized.The teachercarefullycontrols th e lan-

Eluageha t is to bc used during instructiorr.Assessments done only using

paperand penci l asks,and () f ten ust n the dominantschool anguage. ven

wherr cchrr<tlogyupports lssessnent,he zrcacletnicasksusually equireonly

wr i t ten language, ev<t id f sounds,of v isuals,of other signsand language

pract iceshat n. ray e in the chi ld 's inguist ic eperto i re.

The tcacher's atlk s often very different from that of thc childrerr.And the

cl iscgursc sed n the classroi lm s very d i f ferent r t lm the authent ic,mul t ip le

colnmunicr l r ionhat takespl : rce n the chi ldren'shome rrnd n informal set -

t ings.F,ven errcherrsho pr ide thenrselvesn usi t tg rn t r l tovi t t ive edagogy

fal l prey at t i rnes o the Ini t i i r t ion-Response-Fcedbackl l tF) seqt renccalso

refcrrecl9 as IRE: In i t ia t ion-Response-Flvaluat iorr)hat has been dent i f icd

in the l i tcrr t t r , r rcOazclen,gt t t l ; Sincla i r& ( loul thard, 197-5) s comnlon tn

classrootl cliscottrse, it h the tcacherquesti()l1il1g,he student esp()nding, nd

th e tcrrcl.rcr vrrltrating nd giving fecclback.

Overview

ln th is chrrptcr ,we wi l l c l isct rss:

e langurtg,e onstruct lolls;

r l:rrrguagirtg rr clif fercnt contexts.

Introduction

Befgrewe ex:1nrinche conceptof bil ingualisrn ha t underliesall lunderstanding

bi l ingLral ducat ion n Chapters3 and 4, i t is important o th ink about langu

irself,becauseanguages both th e nedium hrough which schoolsubiects re aug

irrrd is also an importanr subject studied in school. Bil ingual education oft

i nv6 l vcs duca t i ngn languages . r fncqu l l pos i t i onsnc l powcr .so t i s m por t

f irst to disclss how certain languageshave come to have the powerful role th

they have today.

Educarorsan d scholarsof bil irrgualeclucation ls o need o be aware of the pu

poses or the imposition of certain anguage cldes, nd especially he standardademic language. uxtaposing hesenotions with th e fluid ways in which langua



with

v

lan-

no t

to

Languaging dnd Education 23

ar e used n th e twenty-first century, what we will here call "languaging," allo."vs

us o understand he changes h.rt we must make conceptually n or-rrhinking about

languageo support the chilclren's anguagepractices n classrooms.

In th is chapter, we focus on the complex mle that bilingual schoolsplay regarding

language.il/hereasall schools,evenmonolingual ones,must negotiate he standard

language hat t l-reyuse and promote, and the intricate language pracfices of

students,t is in bil ingual schools hat this complexity comes o the fore. In bil in-

gualschools he heterogeneity f language racticesnvolving wo or more languagesis much mclre ntricate thirn the tw() standard languages n isolation that schools

us ean d promote. It is preciselv his tensic>n etween the heteroglossic anguage

pract icesf emergent i l ingual rand hi l ingualstudents, nd the standard anguage

promoted n school, hat makesbil ingual eclucrrtion uch a ferti leground fo r thrnk-

ingabout anguage.t is the task of any b i l ingualschool o bui ld on this tensiorr ,

as t acknowledges nd ut i l iz .eshe chi ld 's complex l ingLr ist ic ract iccs o ensure

that the use of two or more st:rndard anguages rre nco rporrrted nto the child's

linguistic epcrtoi e.

LanguageConstructions

Constructinganguage

Makoni oncl Penrrycook 2007) have proposecl hat ()ur prescntconccpf ionof

languagewirs originally ct>nstructecly statcs hirt wanted to consolidatepolit icrrl

power,and ir r sc ldoing cstabl ishedanguagcacademies, ncouraged he prepara-

tion of gramnrilrs, ictionaries, nd tleatiseso strerlgthen nclstandardizeirnguages,

and encouragedhe enunrerat ion i languagcs n ways that rnasked hei r d i f fer-

ences r s imi lar i t ies. '$( l i th egarcl o language cadernies,mong he f i rst was rhe

Accademia le l la l rusca, ourrdedn Florencen 1572 o uphold hc Tusc: rn i i r lect

of Danteand Petrarch.n 163.5CardinalRichel ieuoLrndedhe Acad6mie rangaise

to prornote clarity, simplicity, an d g<xrd aste ir.rFrench. And in.l7. 1 , the Real

AcademiaEspaiiola was estirblished n Spain with its morro of "lnnpia,

fi la

y da

esplendor" cleans, tabil izes, nd givessplenclor), hrrmpioningSpanish Casril iana)

and keeping t urlcontamirrated. hroughout th e eighteenth entury,other language

academieslour ished n turope, and Arabic bodies were establ ishedn several

count r ies,nclucl ing yr i i r , raq, Egypt ,and fordan.Academiesn Damascus, a i ro,

Baghdad,Amm:rn ancl Rabat all work fo r their own interest in the standarcl-

izat ionand spreacl f Arabic ( I -aroussi ,2003).Of f ic ia l and semi-<>f f ic ia lgencies

in multi l ingual African and Asian ccluntriesar e concerned with both li lnguirge

purif ication,as well as languageselection. n Mal:rysia, ndonesia,and Singapore,

where Malay is used,-fhe

Handbook fo r th e Formatitn ofTechnical Terms wa s

agreed pon in 1975.

In contrast to theseefforts to control language, here has never been an official

English arrguage caderny.The rnaior rep<-rsiroryor standard English is in dic-

tionaries, hough there have beennrany ndividual guidebookson usage on e of th emore famous being Fowler's Modern English Usage 1968, revisedby Sir Enrest



24 Bilingualism and Education

Gowers,Oxford, Oxford UniversityPress]).n 1755, Samuel ohnsonpublish

greatdicionary, stabil izingEnglish,bu t rejectingwhat he called inguistic emb

ing." In the United States,Noah'Websterpublishedhis dictionary n 1827, rem

"improprieties and vulgarisms," but staying away from prescription.

That the construction of language, as we know it today, is t ied to pol

control is evident, or example, n the caseof Spanish.Th e year of the enco

between he Old and the Ne w \il/orld, 1.492, s also the year of the conque

th e last Arab k ingdorn of the Iberian Peninsula n Granada and of the expulsJews by the Catholic monarchsl t is also he year of publication of Elio Anton

Nebrija's €1anlmar, hc first grammar of a modern turopean language.Neb

work cxplicit ly Iinks the standardizirt ion f language, hrough a grammar, t

c<rnscrlidaticrnf polit ic:rl powcr, as it claims: "siempre ld lengua fu e comp

del imlterio" (languagewas always the corr.rpani<>nf empire).

Thc socia l onst ruct ion f language as not s imply inr i ted o Europe. n K

for exarrrple,King Sejong nventcd Hangul, the pl.ronenric lphabet organize

syl labic krcks n the f l f teenth entury.Hangul repl : rcedhe Chinese haracte

had becn usccl.

ln the cirseof colonized popr,rlations, constnrctecl"state lirnguagcswere

"rrc lnr in ist rat ivelyrssigned" o thcrn (Makoni ancl Pet t r rycook, 007). Be

strttes,hcre were rnissionariesrn dcolonial off icerswl.rocvangelized, onvertedt ro l lecl , rncl rc lministereclo lonizedpopulat ions. . r r ingt< ln2001) has sht lwn

nr issiorrr r r ics. rnclo loni r r lof f iccrs nrp<lsedhcsc " i t rvented"nronol i th ic ang

orrtospecific crritorics.F<lr xanrplc,Batitro 200.5) lescribesow thc rivirlrybe

tw o nrissionrrry rgrtnizitt i<lnsccl to separirtcorthographies or two langua

( l r r r rcroon I rwr lndoarrc l u lu which are rrutual ly nte l l ig ib lc. he sanre ap

whcn rnissiorrar icslcveloped i f fcrcnts igrr ing ystcrnsor schools or the De

thc Afr icrrn onrcxt (Mi lcs, 200-5).

M i i h l h r i us l c r2000 : 3 l l ) has sa i c l l . r a t hc "n<> t i on f ' a l angu : rge ' n rak

senserr nrost raclit iorral ocictics herepc<lplc neage n mLrlt iple iscursivc rt

rurong hcnrseves."Mi ih l l r r iusler 1996: .5) xpla ins h: r t " the iderr t i f icat ion

guagcs nci hcir subscclucnt rrnring s far frorl beingan act of objectivc escrip

Ancl spcrrk i r rg l f hc Paci f ic cgion, he corr t i r r r - rcs:The not ion of ' : r langua

<lncwh<lse pplicebil ity o thc l)acif ic egion, rn d n fact lclst sitr-tationsutside

f<rundwithin nroclcrn luropean rrrt i()n-states,s cxtrcnrely imitecl" 1996:7). Rom

c()ncl r rs i th Mi ih lhr iusler hcn clcscr ib inghc contplex angr-ragcse n Papua

( i r - r i r rea;hc si rys 1994 l2) : " the very conccpt<l fc l iscrete: rnguagess proba

Fiuropean ultural artiftrct ostcredby proccdures ucha.rsitcracy rndstandardiz

Alty itttcmpt to coLllttdistinct langr-ragcs il l be an artifact of classif icator

cedurcs i r ther han : r ref lect ionof cornmunicat ive ract ices. "RegardingA

Sanrar in 1996) has referrcd o it as "i r cont inerr twi th<lut anguages."n ge

languages arvc eencorrstitutecleparatelyoutsideand abovehuman beings" Y

1996: 28) ar.rcl ave litt le relartionshipo the ways in which people us e ang

thci r d iscursive r i rct ices, r what Yngvealsocal ls hei r " languaging." .angu

as Shohamy (2006b) says, efers o languagepracticesof people.

[-anguages re sociallyconstructed this is the reasonwhy there s no cons

on the number of languages n the world. According t<>Ethnologze, collect



"embalm-

removing

polit ical

encounter

of

io n of

ni o de

Nebr i ja 's

, to the

nerd

In Korea,

I n t o

rs fhat

were he n

Beyond

I , con-

n how

languages

between

) s I n

happcned

th eDcaf in

kes irt le

practices

o f l an -

nptlon. "

language's

those

f. Rornaine

Papua ew

probably

non.

y pro-

Af r ica,

In general,

language,

Languaging,

consensuscollected y

Langwaging and Education 25

SIL nternational,a Christian-faith-basedanguage-preservationociety, here ar e40,000names or different languages, lthough the societycounts close o 7,000languagesGrimes,2000). :,thnologueGordon,200-5: o pag.)againnotes hat "thedefinit ionof languageon e choosesdependson rhe purpose one has in identifyinga language."

Languages truly a social notion that cannot be definedwithout reference o it sspeakers nd the context in which it is used (Heller, 2007).It is also true, how-

ever) hat language s a psychologicalan d grammarical notion. Fo r example, th ementalgrammarsof personA an d personB ma y be more similar to the grammarsof personA and person c, although whether A and B end up speaking he samelanguages a sociopolit icaldecision. t is important then to recognize hat, despitethe act ha t languageha s a psychologicaland linguisticcomponent, r is the socialcontext n which it is used,an d the wishesancl power of it s speakers, ha t deter-mines ts role - especially n schools.

The state

It is common practice to associatc starc with a single language.Fo r example,it is generally houghr that French s spoken in FrancewhereasSpanish s used 1Spain; nd that Danish Sign I -anguages used n Dennrark,whereasCostaRicalSign anguages used n Costa Rica.However, with rnulti l ingualismbeing he norrlin manycountr ies. uchau associat ion asbeen al led rr t< l uest ion. ince he pub-f icat ion f Anderson'snf luent ia l maginedCommuni t ies 1983), t hasbeenwidel l 'acceptedha t nation-stateswere inraginedand narrated nt o being. A nation-stateisa mental ot rst ruct radeup <l faf f in i r ies uchas anguagcwirh imaginedpeople.Anderson 19t i3: l -5)expla ins hat thesenr l t ion-statesre i rnagined onrmunir iesbecauseth e membersof evcn the smallestnation will never know most of theirfellow members, tleet them or cven hear of thcnr, yet in rhe rninc{of each livesthe mage f thei r conrmunion." lut a l though l rc-seat i ( )n-statesni te " i r ragined"

communities, l.reyoften divide "real" communities that share languageancl cr.rl-ture.Perhapshe trost obvior.rs xample rcre s tl-rat f African nari()ns.Ar the BerlinConferencef 1f l8-5, o l i tica l boundar icswere cl rawrr t r ight angles o the coasr-

l ine,and neither inguistic areasnor f<lrmerkingdornswere cclnsidered.That nation-states re constructed s confirrnedby the fact that in the beginning

of the wentiethcenturl, here vcreonly sixty s<>vereigntetes.At th e end of \Worlcl

Wa r II therewere seventy-f<lr-rrtates; oday there are approximately200, with thenumberchanging rcquently.Th e constructionsconrinue.

The linguistic consequctrces f the construction of nation-stetL-s av e lreepgreat. ew states rlveever beenmonolingual n their makeup,ancleven oday thereare very few countries in th e world that ca n bc considered inguistically homo-geneoussee .ewis, 1981). Iceland rnd possib lyKorea are probably the onlyclear-cut aseswhere the entire autochthonouspopulation usesone and the samelanguageor the majority of its social nteraction.The rest of the world. whethercountries n the Anrericas,Africa, Asia, Europe, clr oceania, an d without raking

into account recent immigration patterns, have ahnost never been inhabited bypeoplewho share one common language.And yet, rh e predominant ideology



26 Bilingualisntan d E.ducation

tends to assclciatenonolingualismwith the norm, where by the dominanceof one

langr-rageithin the bordersof a polit ical entity is considered s more natural)more

desirable, rnore efficient, and more productive for the sake of cohesion han

real i tywarrants.

In 1967, Mackey wrote that "bil ingualisnr, frrr frotn being exceptional, s a

ltroblent which affects he majority of the world population" (11; our italics;an

unfortunateway of presenf ing he issues nvolved). n the ear ly 1980sGrosjean

(1982 vi i ) est imated hat at leasthal f the wor ld 's populzr t ion as b i l ingual , incetherewerc thirtv t imes as many languages s here were countries. n 2000, Grimes

l isted r,809 enguagesn over 200 count r ies.

Mackey (2003) ha s pointed out that, in th e past,a languageused o be th eprop-

erty rf its r.rscrs,ndicirted b,v he narle itself; fo r c'xarrrple,l ingua nglictt. ingua

r()mdnLt ustica. Br,rtwith the rise of the state, languagebecamc associated ith

thc lanr l i r r which i t was spoken. -ess harr 25 percentof the wor ld 's 200 or so

c<runtries ec<lgr.rizcw( ) ()r urore <lf l ici:rl langLragesTucker, 191)8).This ha s

imp<lrtant c()nsequenccs<> r ducation, since t tunrs ()ut that although therear e

r lore b i l i r rgui r l rnd nrrr l t i l ingualncl iv ic lualsrr t l re"vor ld

than rnonol inguals,nd

rn<rre :rnguagesha n states, he fact that education takes place in the de jureor

de facto5official language ncans hat rnost children rr thc world are educatedn a

langirage ther t lranrhat <lf

hel.r<lrnc.It lr<luglr atior.r-statcsay

havebeenmentalarrd magir.redorrstructs,ts consequcncesrc not irnaginary or minorit ized anguage

communi t ics vi th in t .

Tocl r ry, s 'nve l iscussurther n the next sect ion, lobal izat ion nd the mobi l i ty

of popul:rt it>ns as nradc us conscior.rs f the fact that specific anguages o not

bclong t( ) territorics ()r sti ltes. lether, langurrges elorrg <> he peoplewho speak

thenr,who are in differcnt geogrirphical paces.Bu t this crcates hil l lengeso polit-

icarl fates hat organizeeducrrtional ystenrs rnd that incrcasingl,v av e o educate

chi ldrcn who clo not speak he school i rngr. ragc. r thome.

CloLur l izat ion

The norrrs in th e rlrgrrnization f wrlrk ancl nrethodsof production broughtabout

by new conrnrur i icat ionechl ro logy nd globa[ izat ion i rvegreat ly mpactedan-gurrging racticesn the twenty-first cntury(Mauraisan d Morris, 2003; New London( i r<rrrp,2000). Fct tes (200. \ :371 sunrrnar izeshc geopol i t ica land technolog

chirnges nd their efiect or-t anguagecornnrur.rit ies:

Ni'rtronalcorrr>rricstrve ecomerl r rr()re rrtcgraretln thc g,lobal conomy; oney

anclworkcrshavc re comc truch torenrobilc; he peccof tcchnologicalhangeas

accelerltcdo an unbelieveblextcnt; rnd hc explosivc rowthof conrmunicationnd

i l t forrr rat i<>rtctu,orkss t>rr he vcrgc'of "arrr r ih i l r r t i r rgpacc." rrcrcasingly,very

lattguirgcotnmunity rustbecort-tclwilreoi it s posit ion n ir "clynanric orldsystemof lrngurges" hzrr:rcterizcdy v:rstancl xprrrding lifferencesn status nduse.

ln the twcnty-firstcentury,we have witnessed he creationof new economicrading

blocs and ne w socioecononric nd so ciopolit ical organizirt ions hat haveaffected



L.angu'tging nd Edttcati<tnZ7

r:ill: ui:16::l; i 'iii::';: t#':;'JIl:H:'n

!' i;,il:il,''r;,.i::ii lqi"v.li{,-j i: lTlii ,".',",,."r11.:1l::'::"t:\h{ :if,:|;i,,ll;.:l'11,..n,,u.ll'li'l'JJlllli:Jt;; J::"T:J':'"' , .,,,,er,nd.ma,r,ti c ines I. \lrsrcr'"

*.ir recognized'n:sheve lso

1.."]j.11,'ljiir':Jt:;.i.'.'ifi,1*rffiQ ";'..*i'Sl,i'"" 2 ,-rL::il,''',....n,,,i::J:..';i:::'il'ii';;i..''" ""' "'li*i' lll :;* ,'.il;:::,.l;l

ili-#T*i**i.'ill**l'l ',$i ,*iil'ol[:r.trll-i--:ril:,tiT:rw jr,*\i'i*lxl;T:*1sj, - ;i"li,,i:il*:::,1;,i'1,'J:::ll,il"']itll::l:*".i'-.nrn,,r1,r1t-11,iy''.ri-ii....r..,::l:]::,lll.,l.l)"i,,i

llltyi ]':SUS

J:i:::';.,..:|..l'.,',-i,jr';j

:;ili',,1';::::';,;

; ,s cc-*';lli

* tc." a.,r,

l*;*;l l ;:l ll'i ,itl:' J.*:,i')-':*"'J]li:li,fl;ru;:lilll'i;:'l:';::::11'l:i|,,'.,*'tll',';::l;i;l.i;lll''ll,i::ll:j,i;:':i;:l,*il:*J,-iliti:ulilil[llll-*i**[tJllni'::ljlj*::i:':..lll

Iil,ll]r , ,w.r,.,,,,.r,,,,,,,.,e

fi***;**r**lttr*,l.:l*ii',"';tl"':'i;

fi;il'il*ttm:rfis:'l[l':,'lri"il:r'*t**:

;,*:s;lnqi;5[::r',:r:T:tfil#;*;.,,::.Iru:;,1itlil,'' liiti*,*s,l: ;,h,1n'r:'.:l'.*

i::"i'f:lt

,i:il-X,'"number tl f irrterrlet



28 Bilingualism and Education

Table 2.1 Internet 7orld Usersby Language

Language Millions of Users o/oRepresent

English

Chinese

Spanish

JapaneseFrench

Clerman

Arabic

Portuguese

Korean

Italian

Rest of languages

42 7

233

r22

94

67

63

60

-58

3. t

34L t . )

30%

1 7 %

9 %ao /

5 %

4 %

4r %

4" 41 0 /

a o /

"l5,%

Mrniwatts Mr rrketing Ciroup,200ti

Between2000 an d 2008, the greatest anguagegrowth on the internet was expe

encedby Arabic (2,062"A), o l lowed by Portuguese668"h),Chinese 622%),an

then French (452%). English experiencedonly a 201 percent growth in th e la

decade Miniwatts Marketing Group, 2008). According to an analysismade n Irela

about the demand and supply of foreign language kills n the enterprise ector Exp

Group on Future Skil ls Needs, 2005), appr oximately 50 percent of usersworl

wide choosea languageother than English o accesshe Google web-search ti l i

(based n data sourced rom Google nc.; www.google.com./press/zeitgeist.html,ugu

2004). And rrewsoftware has made the availabil ity of different scriptseasier.Man

websitesare using multi l ingual strategies, l lowing consumersand users o acc

information in th e language hey prcfer. Machine translation is readily availab

Thcre are even wcbsites hat allow internet users o communicatewith eachoth

in sign languagcs.An d Internet pr()gramssuch as Camfr<lg,MS N Messenger

Skypeallow Deaf people o reach out beyond national boundariesan d seediffere

sign anguagesn use.For the Deaf con.rmunity,he improvement n cochlear mpla

technology ha s changed he boundariesof the community, and sign language ahad to be renegotiatedas important in the education of the Deaf.

Although F,nglish s widesp read n th e media, and in news in particular, wit

BB C an d CN N predominating,other languages re usedmore an d more. Since h

establishnrent f Al . lazeera n Qatar in 1,996,Arabic has had an important inte

nationalpresencen the newsmedia. n 2003, Al Arabiya was launched rom Duba

with Saudi backing. And in 2005, Telesurstarted ts transmission n Spanish ro

Caracas. n Canada,on September1, 1999, he Aboriginal Peoples elevisionNerwo

(APTN), with programming relevant o First Nations and Indigenouscommunit

around the world, was launched.Approximately 30 percentof al l programming

in Indigenousanguages.T'With the advent of DVDs, viewershave options of languages r subtit les, si

this asa way to developbil ingualproficiency.Secondary udio Programming SAavailableon televisionsetssince1990, enablesone to seea televisionprogram h



experl-

) , and

the ast

in reland

(Expert

world-

util ity

August

ier, any

t0accessavailale .

other

r o r

different

implant

has

, with

Sincehe

ln te f -

Dubai,

ish romNetwork

nltres

ng ls

uslrlg

(sAP),m that

Langwaging and Edwc:atictrt 29

is close-captioned;ha t is , has text that accompanies he video, or is in different

languages.7hereas he close-captionings especially seful or the Deaf corlmun-

ity,8 he languageoption of SAP allows for a bil inguzrl elevisionexperience. or

example, tarting fall 2005, all prime-time televisionshows on the second argest

U.S. elevisionnetwork, ABC, are available n SAP dubbed in Spanish ot close-

captioned. hi s no t only makes t possible or U.S. Latinos who pref-erSpanish <r

watch hese rograms,but also for Anglophorles o improve their Spanish. n addi-

t ion, subtit lesallow U.S. l-atinoviewers

to strengthen heirEnglish skil ls, while

the dubbing of television programs develops heir formal Spanish.An American

womanmarried o a Deaf Italian and living in Rome watchesnrovieson DVD with

English ialogLre nd Italian s ubtit les. But sometimes, anguagesar e switched so

that the American wonlan can hear ltalian and the Italian man can practice his

reading f Engl ishpr int (Cole,personal ommunicat ion,November26,2005). In

Japan, Vs and VCRs have a button similar to the SAP button which allows th e

viewer o turn off th e lapanesedubbing and listen to the prograrn in its original

languageRob Werner, person: r l ommunicar iorr ,October 12,2(106). t is thcn

possibleo watch Yankee lanres n English, AI Jazeera n Arabic , or the tretwork

news hannels f France,Spain,Korea,and others.a l l in thei r or ig inal angu: rges.

Becausef irnproveclechnology rnclbetterpublic fturding or scrvices, cople vh<r

ar eDeaf can conrmunicatewith hcirring people over the irrternct,viclecl claying,"

an dother ornrsof written comnrunicatir>n. personma y us eAmericansign anguage

and borrow signs ronr orher s ign langui rgcs ur ing a s ingleconvcrsat ion, nd

another erson may use a webcarn () sign with rrnotherviewer anc{,at the sanre

time,send nstant messagesn ir written language o that viewer ((iole, writtc'n

communication,anuary 3. 2007).

Th e echrrologiesf the two'rty-firstcentury have enr.rbledliscursive ()nstructions

that unction simultirneously n spacean d time. Wl-rat s differcnt today from tl.re:

ways n which people irnguaged n th e nirreteenth rld twcntieth century s thirt we

can imul taneouslyrncl o l labor i r t ivc ly ng: rgen many di f fcrent anguagel )r : rct iccsat the same ime. as happens n electr<>nicnstarrt r-nessagirrgnd chirtt ing. An d

in so doing, ther:e s a ffleaslrre f "agency" that did no t exist prior to the teclr-

nological evolution. Thar is, spcakersar c no w free to choosea broader rarrgcof

languageractices han those<lffercdby th e irnmediate ommunity and the school;and they can use then'r n ways that irre rlot reflected n mtire irrstitLrti<irralized

language racticesof schoolsanclofficial publications.

Lingua rancas are one way in which conrmunicirt ionacross he statc borders

hasbeenachieved. ingua francasare often eit lrernurnericallypowerful languages

such s Arabic, C-hinese, nglish, or Spanislr,or a plannecl nternational rrrrguage

such s Esperanto.Esperarrto, n artif icially constrLrctedanguage,wa s inventecl y

L.L, Zamenhofat the enclof the nineteenthcentury to se rveas a s econd anguagc,

in order to foster internationaI peace and understandir.rg. n international sign

systemor Deaf langr-rage sershas also been developed.None of theseartif icial

l ingua rancashas b een completelysuccessful.

English,Graddol (2006) tells us, is a growing lingua franca, especially n Asia

(see sui and Tollefson, 2007). In many countries he learning of English s con-sidered basicskil l, to be taught in school alongsideMath an d Literacy. And yet



30 Bilingualism dnd Educati<tn

English does not enjoy complete hegemony n the world. Mandarin is also grow-

in g as r l ingua fr-anca. nd rhereare other langueges xperiencing ro'lvth. n Nonh

Africa :rnd West Africa, Arabic is growirrg much more quickly than English. n th e

United States,Spanishcompete's ith English. Global English may be on th e rise,

but so is g lobal Chinese, lobal Arabic, and global Spanish.As a f i rst language,

English s beingchallcnged y both Spanish nd Hincli-Urdu,and is said o be fall ing

frorn second to fourth place (Chinese holds the first place). Dernographically,

Arabic is growing faster hanany

othcr u 'or ld language Gradclo l ,006).That thc l inguist ic krrv,even r . r hc mecl ia,s n<>trow unid i rect ional r favor ing

Engl ishhi rsbeen nuchcl iscussedy Crecldol 2006).Gracldol ivessonrc nteresr-

ing cxanrples. 'rL,:rst sia, Chiuese nd f lpancsc ier,verstrc m()re nterestedn soap()per:ls rr>rnKorea than those rom th e UniteclStates, nc l fapaneseManga comics

are l l r ( ) re rn; ror t i rnt harrEngl ishconr ics. he inf lLrerrcef Bol lywood, he Hindi -

lar.rguageil m industry n lnclia. ompetes vith Hollyrvood n all of Asia.And Spanish

talenouclas so:rp<>peras)rc increasirrgly cen by North Arnerican houscwives.n

irrct, he S;ranis h-languagc rtit, isirht, hc fifth largest clevisionsfation in the U.S.,

has a growine Anglophoncviewingaucl ierrce.

In tcrntsof seconcl - languagesers, ut< lnehLraMandar in)h<l ldsi rstp l i rce, nd s

er.nergingtsextrenrclv rnportant n other F.ast sian c()Llntries,uch as South Korea.

Th e tlrst (.onfucius nstitutcdr'clicatedo tcrrching )utonghuaopenecln Scoul,South

K<rrca,n N<lvenrbe2004, and ot l rershavc <lpcned n thc L ln i teclKingd<lm,he

LJni tcd t i l tes, f r ica,Aust ra l ia, nd ( lont i r rent i r l .urope. able2.2 d isplays he en

written lanuu:rges lrich hrrve hc most scconcl-langurlscsers exprcsscdn rnrll ions).

Wc shouldend his scct i ( )n r rg lobal iz- i r t iony 1' ro int ing)ut he pcrsistcntr lport -

rurcc rf he ocal (Oanagrrrajrrl\ 999,200.5e), f whar AppaclLrrai1996)cells global-

izr t t i< lnrorn below." Recent ly, hc tcrnr "e locrr l izat ion" rrs recncoined o note

thc prescncc f thc locrr l r r thr 'g lobal and vice vcrsr l . ro t a 1997confcrence n

"( ikrbal izat ior . tr rc l lndigcnoLrs,u l turc. " Rolarrc l {obcrtson lef inccl k lcal izat ion

as " the si rnul t r rnei ty thc c<l -presenccof both universal iz ing nclprrr t icu lar iz ing

tenclencie.

As nrrtionrrlclentit ies avebcconrc raenrc'nteclhrr>rrghhe wcakcningof the nation-

statecortst ruct i ( ) l r .he re lat i< lnshipet r ,vcenrrngrr lgc nc l dcnt i ty s nrr l re clevant

Tablc 2.2 Seconcl-l.rtnguageJsers

Mrrnder i r r

I '.nglish

F I i r r

Sprr sh

l {uss iar r

Bcr rgri

Por tugucsc

t r r I l l - i J l I

French

.f tprrne c

t ,0.52

.508

487

4 1 7

277

2 l l

l 9 t

l 2 u

t - j 6

I j ron r : I - ig t t re1..17, i r ld rL r l . 200(r, bascLl n Ostlr t ' , .()0-5

I

2

.)-+5

6

7

=n

l 0

to

th

F

L

th

L

L

C

u

o

thS

or

afopr

anla

bo

cofo

spsy

ac

Qby

Ch

Co

Ge

the

of

peco



grow-

InNorth

In the

the rise,

language,

be alling

a l ly ,

favorirrg

lnterest-

ln soap

comics

Hindi -

Spanish

ives. n

theU.S..

and s

h Korca.

, South

m, the

the cn

mi l l ions).

lmport-

"globil l-

to note

ic on

lzaf lon

r iz ing

nati()n-

rele rrn

Languaging and Education 31

today than ever (Canagirrajah, 200-5b). Responding to scholars and crit ics who view

th e processof globalizat ion as rnaking cthnicity an d language dif ferencesunnecessary,

F ishman(2001: 460) notcs :

Someof thc very pr()cesscs f globalizrt ion rrnclpost-tnodernrsm hat were supposed

to be rnostclcleteriouso purportedly "parochial" identitres :rveactr.rally ontributed

most to their re enrergcnce rs "plrt- iclcnt it ies."' l 'he

increasing -rbicluity f the civil

state, f civi l lrrrt ionrrl ismrrrcl,hereforc,of a sharecl upra-ethnic ivi l nat ionalisrnas

part of thc identity constcllrrt ion f all cit izens,has rcsulted n rrorc r:rther hern es s

recognit ion f rrult iculturrr l isrn rt hc inst itr-rt iortalcvel rtnd a trorc widespread ntplc-

menta t iou i loca l c thn ic i t i , i l s : r cor . ln tc rb i r lanceo c iv i l r ra t ion : r l i s rnt thc leve lo f

organizccl i lr t- idcrlt i tv.

Languageplays r r v i ta l ro le in today 's g l< lba l izedwor lc l , and i t is t r to rc in tp t t r t r tt r t

t han eve r t t c t l t t e r t t i o t t .

Languaging

Languagingncl lurguagcs

Close ourcycsancl istcrrwi t l . r our " inncr ear" r ' ts at r ic ia lar in i (2000)has aught

us o do, to chi lc l rcrra lk ing to errch )rher n rr c l r rssroom,n rr p laygrot l l td .Or

openyour cycs encl sec [ )crr f scl . rool h i lc l ren igrr ing.Br ing to y()ur rn i r lc l 's ye

the w<lrc ls f c l r r r r r rctcrsn rr nrovie,a tc lcvis ionshow, a play, or t l rc worcls<l f

Shakespearc,crvlrntes, tnclProust olr r r pilge,or evcn those <lf l pcrsoll you l<lvc,

or of the culrri lyou hevc jLrst xchrrngccl. r l 'rerrrhc worcls of a praycr uttered n

a Nat iveAnrcr icrrni rnguauc.)cople anguagc or t .nrr t ' tyurp()ses. hcy lar tguage

forcx; rression,or intcrr tct i< ln,rnr l ( ) exprcss cfcrct rceAgcr,200 ). But language

pract ices irn l r ls< l c turrrecl r r to sonreth ing bout wl r ich pc<tplc, o l t r t t t t t t t i t ies,

andstares rrvcopin ior . rsrnd ccl ings Agcr, 200 1). That is, l : rneurrgcr i rct ices)r

languaging rlso .rct rs rr syr/,r()/ systant li ishnran, 1996); lrey cr.ttr ccotttesyt'tt-

bol ic f thc spcech onmruni tv tscl f l r of srrcreclncss.hus, anguaging,rr lct iecsl rc

codificdnt o languagcs.ior exrrnrplc, Jrclu as rcconre r1 ll lportr'uttclentitymitrkerfor Prtk istanisf tcr inclepenclcrrcc,r l t l . r< lughnly a nr i r ror i ty i Pakisranisrcrual ly

speakst . l . ikcwise, hc wi ry i r r which peopleusc ( ler ibbean l rcolc has uportant

symbol ic igrr i f icarrccol rn, rny src or cxi ln lp leWi l l is ,2002l . Sorr terrnguagcsave

acqui recl s i lnct i ty l inrensi< ln..xanrplesf srrcrcclarrguagcsre Bibl icalHcbrew;

Qur 'anicArrrb ic;Srrnskr i t ,hc language f Hinclu isn. t' tnclhc Vedas; -ar t in, sed

bytheRonran latholic(ihr-rrch; lc l (lhurch SLrvonic, sed n sorneOrthodox Eastern

Churcl rcs; ve t rut , hc languagcof the Z<tror tst r i i t t r rholy l t t l< tk, he Auesta;

Copt ic, hc l i turg ical larrguagc f thc ( iopt ic Orthoclox C)hurch;Olcl T ibetan;

Ge'ez, sed rr hc l i turgy of thc EthiopiarrOrthocloxChr, r rc l . r ;a l i , he lar tguage f

theTheravada lLrdclh isnrcr iptures t l rePal i ( i r rnorr) ; evcral cr ipt t r ra languages

of the lrasterrrOrthockrx Ohr-rrches;nd the ccrcnroni:l l anguages f lndigelrous

peoples. or nrrrnyNat ive Arner icrrr rs,hei r lar-rguageract iccs re inst rumcnts fcommunicat ion i th l iv ing ancl rncest r i l l r spi r i tualent i t ies s wel l , and language



32 Bilingwalism and Education

and the notion of "spir it" are ntertwined.rz he Anishinaabe, lso known as Oj

believe hat their language,Ojibwemowin, was given to them at their t ime of

t ion as human beings.Their language s thereforeviewed as a gift which mu

honored,an d is th e only language hat can be used n their ceremonies. ipp (2

17) expla ins:

Tribal languagcsontain he trihal genesis,osmology, istory,and secrets ithlVithoutthemwe maybecornecrmanentlyost,or inevocably hanged.am a Pik

and kn<rwwhy. n our anguage,am a nizitapiwa, rcalperson.t derivesrom h

nry angu:rgereats he orn"ror "1 " or "rne" spoken s "rtiz,"ar erivative f nr:st

or rn y bocly.When speakPikuni,my bociyand spirit speak o kizitapiwa, not

realoersort.

Furthernrore, anguage or many Native Amcrican comnrunitiesdefinesplace

ecologyof hornelandcan be spokenand Llnclerstooclhrclr.rgh irt ivc anguage

ex:rnrple, uni Pucbkrmcmbcr L,n<ltc2002: 30) st:rtes:Ou r language ellsus a

our umbi l ica lcorcls h:1t o out across he larrdsc: rpe,he val leys, he textureo

l l ( )u l1t1r ins,any()ns, l inrate, he creat ionof beings.Becat rse e havebeen

silnreplace for a very, very long time, throul3h his langr-rage, e c an affect s

th ing. My unclerstandings in nry vocabulary. "

Somc rrnguagcsrre <lralancl lre not written, for examplesonreAmerindiagui lges )r soureof the " t r ibal languages" f Indi r r .And then there are lang

thrlt are sigrred nd no t writtcn. A sign angu:rgcs a linguistic ystem f manual/

no t vocal/aurrrl, ommunicationwith its own phonological, 'r<lrphokrgical,yn

and semant ic ules Cole, or thcorning). " . fustikc a l l chi ldrcn,Deaf chi lc l rcn

up and larrguirge s thcy l)rrrt iciprtc n soci;rl ntcractions rncl s thcy network

rel : r t ives,r iencls, : rndnenrbers f the comrlur . r i tyrr c l i f fcrentways. )e i r f chi

do n<l ta l l comnrunic i r ten the sameways: someprefer o speakand use: rs

deviceso hc: rr ) thers, omc Llsemainly s igning, : rnclhen thereare somewh

both spccch rncl igrr ingl .or wr i t ten cornrnunicat ion, eaf chi lc l ren )perate

much in the sameway as <>ther hi lc l ren. l rey reaclnewspapers, r i te let t

ernails,send ext mess:lges ver the phone, and skirn thror,rgh extbooks.

l.angr-ragesre not f ixed c<ldes y then'rsclves;hey are fluid cocles ramed wsocia lpract ices. 'o < lp1-rcrl99t t : 1.57-t r i ) ,< lrcx: rmple, : l rgues:There s no na

fixed strr.rctureo language. tathcr, speakcrsbrlrrow hca vily from thcir prc

exper iences f cornmunicat ion n simi lar c i rcumstanccs,)n si rn i lar opics

wi th simi lar ntcrkrcutors.Systemat ic i ty,n th is v iew, is an i l lusi< ln roduc

th c partial settl ing or sedintentation of freqr-rently sed forn.rs nto temp

systems" our i ta l ics) .According o th is conceptual izat ion,t is not langr-rag

exist ,but d iscourseslhat is , ways of ta lk ing or wr i t ing wi th in a context .Fol lo

Michel Foucault, discourseconceives anguage as a form of social practice

naturally occurs n cor"rnectedpeechancl writtcn text with those whcl partic

in the event.15 ngve (1996), Shohamy(2006\, an d Makoni and Pennycook 2

go beyond discourse o say that ther e is only languaging:social practices ha

actions perforrned by our meaning-makingselves. Vhat we have learned odialects,pidgins,creoles, nd academic anguageare nstances f languaging:



- th e

For

about

th e

in he


practiceshat we perform. In the section belclw,we rurn our attention to theseorac-ticesas they have beenstudied within tradit ional languageconceptualizationi.

Dialects

In considering he role of languagepractices n bil ingual education, he notion ofdialect s of special mportance.Fo r linguists, he term "dialect" is a neutral termused or varianrs of :r specif ic anguage.Romaine (1994)

definesdialect as

,. a

subordinatevariety of a language," and refers to regional dialects, associatedwitha place, ocitt ldialecfs,associated it h soci:rlclass,and historic,t ldialects eferringto ancestors f present anguagevarieties.There ar e alsoetbnic dialectsspoken byethnol i gu sr icgroups.

However, ay people often reserve he term "dialect" fo r languages r ways ofusing anguage hat are socially stigmarized.Fo r exarnple, nany people hink thatwhat they speak o friends and farnil ies n informal setrings s a dialect,an d whattheyspeak n sclror>ls a language. ndeed,when stateswant to ensure ha t peoplewho engage n certair.r irnguaging practices remain oppressed, hese practicesare often referred to as dialects;although when the speakersof these so calleddialects chievepolit ical power, they are then often designated s languages.Ma xWeinreichs often quoted as having said that "a Lrnguages a dialectwith an arrnyand a navy" (seeRomaine, 1994:12). This serveswel l to renr ind us thar thedifference etween what people call a dialcct :rnd a language s mosr oftel norl inguist ic, ut socia l ,and having o d' wi th the power of i ts speakers.

Af r ikaans, hc reeional anguages f Spain rnd most of Europe,euechua, andLuxemburgish re examples f th is process. f r ikaans n South Afr ica was con-sidered dialectof Dutch until the 1920swhen the languagewa s stantlarclizeclndit sstatus aisedas a resultof the success f the Afrikarrerpolit icalmovernent.Duringthe dictatorship of Francisco Franco, (latalan, Basclue E,uskarar, ') nd Galiciair(Gallego) .vereefcrred o as dialcctsby rneny n the Sparrish,speakingorld. Theywereno t taughf in schools,exccpt n "urrdergror-rnd" ff<>rtsuch as the kastriast7in theBasque ountry.Upon l " ranco's eath, he new SpanishCclnst i tut ion f l97BrecognizedSpanish as the official larrguageof the stirtc, an d named Catalan.

Euskara' and Cialician as oftf icial regi<lnal anguages n th e respecrive egiclls.Recently,he term lengua egictttdl(regionalangu:rge) as been eplaced .t y enguapropia ow n language),ndicating h:rt Catalan,L,uskara, nd Galicianar eevenm()rethan regional anguages;hey arc of f ic ia l anguages f tht isenat ional i t iesust ascast i l ian spanishr8),r rd r l l o thersare spain 'sown. In much the sameway, manyof the dialectsof Europe, as thcy hnve previously beencalled, have no w receivedinstitutional upport an d a changeof status o "regiclnal anguage,"as a result ofth e Council of F.urope's uropean Charter for Rcgional or Minority Languages.

In Lat in Arner ica,Quechua,spoken by 8 ro l2 ni i l l ion speakers crgssperu,

Ecuador,Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, and Colonrbia, s often designated s a dialect.only recently, and with it s ofl icialization in peru, Ecuador, an d Bolivia, hrrs

Quechua chieved tatl lsas a language, ven hough this designationalso obscures

the act that there are multiple varietiesof Quechtrir,many of which are not mutu-ally ntell igible Hornbergeran d Coronel-Molirra,2004). Srmilarly.according o th e

an d

, b v



34 Bilingualism rnd Education

constitution of Luxcmbclurg,Luxemburgish is a language,although linguistically

someconsic lert a Rhennishdia lect .

Many lay peoplealso r tssumehat d ia lects re var iet ies f a language hat arentututrl ly intell igible, hat is , speakersare able ro undersrandeach other. But, ofcourse,mlr tual nte l l ig ib i l i ry as l i t t le to do wi th larrguage, nd more to do wi thpeople, since t is peoplewho uuderstirndeach other. And nrany cases ontradictthe asst rmpt ionhrr t d ia lectsare mutual ly inte l l ig ib lewhereas angu:rges re nor.Fo r

exarnple,Srveclish, orwegian, rrnd Danish are consiclered ifferent anguagesal though hey rrre nutual ly nte l l ig ib le nd the di f ferences re nor l inguist ic,butpolit ical atrc'l ultttr:rl l{ornaine,1994).We speirkof dialectsof Chinese ven houp;hat lc: , rst ght of thcnr r remut t ra l ly r rcornprchensib le.indi , Punjabi , nd [Jrduarei r l l c loscly c l r r tcclrncl , or the nrost p i r r t , nrutu i l l ly nte l l ig ib lc, l thor-rghl rey useci i f ferent cr ipts.Af ter Incl iabecrrmendependent , incl i eadcrs la i rned hat t l rduanclPtrniirbi ,vere l irrlcctsf II indi. With th c irrdcpenderrccf Pakistan,Urc'lu ecamerccogrr izeclrsa tot r l l ly c i i f fererr tangu: rge dopt ing: rn Arabic scr ipt ,wi th Punjabrr lso ccciv ins csiorra l ccogni t ion n lndia.

I t t t l re corr tcxtof Af r icrr , 3et ibo 2005: 2) givesLrs he cxam;r leof the Chaggapeople t rhc foof of \ ' loLIntKi l i ru: rn jaro, ho consic lcrhcntselvespertkers f onel rr t tet r r rgc,l thorrgh inguist ical lyhcre; rrc rhrcc c l i f fererr t peccl ' rornrswhich arent l t nrut t r r t l lvr t te l l ig ib lc.t t cot r t rast , perrkcrs f Sesoth<1.etswanrr ,nc lSepecl insouthcrnAt ' r ica ec hctnsclvcs s speaking hrcedi f fercnt anguages,l thoLrghheyare l lutL la l ly r t tc l l ig ib lend coulc lbe corrs idcreclar iet ies f one l i rngrragc.

Becat tsehe cl i f terenccsrct ' "veert ' ,v Iat c<lp lcci r l l languegc pcl r , r ,hat hc1cal l c l ia lectsrreof tcn soci r l lv c()nst i tutc( I ,t is l ref tcr o use he ternr " ' " ' l r ie t ics" ilangLragc'racticcs vl'rcn ;reaking f cliffercntways n which people :rngurrl;c, hetheri r r st r r r rdart l) r norrstanclard rrys. t is inrportent o emphasize,hough, hat t l . resvrrr ict ies rc n() t iso latcclwholes,but consistof tcr t tureshi r t conte n anclout ofthe langt rr rg inghat pc()p le lo, wi t l t the c l i f f r ' rentingrr ist iccrrrurcshat r r r r rke rpt l rc i r ingrr ist ic cpcrtorrc.

Pic lg ins rrrc l rc<l lcs

Atrothcr r t r rguagc()prc het is inrport i ln t or bi l i r rgrr : r lc lucarors rc 1, l i r /g iz lsrrdL' rc() l (s.) idgi r tsalc clcf i r rccl y ' l i r rg,u isrss l r t r rguegcshat cor lc i r r to bci r rg r rcont r ' lc t i t r raf ions, nr l arc usccl y spcakcrswi th r l i f ' fcrentiur .qur lgeackgr<lunc

t t>cot t r t t t r t t t icr t te,vpicel l l ' to t raclcor in p lanf i r t i ( )n ontcxts.For us, they are ust

rr t tothcr nrrr t i f t 's t i r t ior tf how pcoplc angurge.St ructural ly pcrrk ing, ic lg ins resi r r tp l i f ic t l ;hat s. hcl ' havc i t t lc rn<l rphologyncl inr i tccl yntax, rnd hcy arc roIrnLrt r r r r i l ln tc l l ig ib le rv i th thc langLragerorrr rvhich thcy clcr ive hei r lexicon.l)idgins .rrc lrval's ealnccl rs sceoncl ,rnguages.

In cotrtrast, vhcn pidgins becornenrrtivizerlancl strrnclarcliz.ed,ncl rrcloptecl sth e rrngrragcf th e honreby thc crrt ircpopulrrt ion, he yar e <nown .r scrcries. ,reolcs

arc sariclo lte lexicallyanclstructr-rrallyorrplcx, rlncl rrc earnecl s first l irnguagesTwtl nrai<lr roLlps licreolcs re r-rsurrl lyl istingr-risheclAtlirnticcrcoles nd l)acif ic

creoles. t lar t t ic ret l lcs vercestabl isheclr i rnal i l l , 'c lLrr inghe scvenrccnthnd cigh-teenthcenfurv n West Af r ica ancl he ( lar ibbc: ln, ts a resul tof the s lave rr rde.



Languagingdn d Education 35

Pacific reoleswere developed n the nineteenthcenturv lvith recruited and ir.rclen-

tured aborers.Th e crecll ization<lf these irrer pidgins was rnore gracl-ral h:rn th e

abruptchangewith Atlar"rt ic reoles.

Th e best-knownAtleutic creole s Haitian Crcole, he co-official anguage, ,rlong-

side rench,of Haiti since1987,and widely spokenby th e vast majority of Haitians.

In th e Pacific area, Tok Pisin, an English-based reole spoken by more than half

the population of Papua New Guinea, Hiri Motu, an indigenous creole, and

English ll shareofficial status n PapuaNe w Guinea,aldroughEnglish s the officialmediurn f educat ion.Bisrnal r rs the n: r t ional anguaee f Vanuatu, bLrt t is for-

bidden n sclro<>1,hereErrglish nd Frcnch:rreused Ror.nirine,994).Dcspitebeirrg

wel l -acccptcdangui rge ysrems hat are part o i the languaging f nr i rnv, reoles,

asotherst igmat ized ract ices, avevery i t t le oi f ic ia l p lace n school .A s igni f icant

exceptions the JamaicanBilinguaIPrir.nary ducati<ln rcljcctwhere angualieprac-

ticeshat ir.rclude lreole re being usec'lo educate Devonishan d Oarpenter,200-5).

Yetcl : rssroomsn. famaica,Hai t i , Papr-ra ew Cluinea, nd Vanuatu have always

beenbi l ingual in rcal i ty, s ince creolesare part o i the langui rg ing ract icesof

chi ldren,rndof the tc i rchers.

Michcl I )e ( i raf f (1999) hrrs r lgrrccl gainstwhrt he cal ls "crcolc cxccpt ioni l l -

ism," that is, thc iclc-ahat becrrusc reolcs hirclno tinre t( ) i lrc()rp()rirtche pirrent-

languagcs'cornplcxr2ln ln l l rs, rnd bcc, rusehev are s( ) new, crcolcsarc sinr i larto eachother: lnd c l i f fcrcr t t rorn ofher langui rgcs. ' "n fact , i f yor-r on)pi l re hc

evolut ionrncl t ructurcs f l - .nsl ish i th thrr to i ( i rcolcs, )e ( i raf f r r rgues,herc s

noway o d ist inguis l r nc f ronr he othcr.This is fhc srrnrc Lr inr naclc y Muysken

(1988 : 300 )w l . ren c says : The ve ry no t i on o f a ( l r co l c r rnuuagero rn he l i r r -

guist ic oi r r tof v icw tcncls o c l isappearf < l r rc<ioks loscly;whet we havc s just

a langulge." n th is rec()nst i tutc( licw, r r crcolc n. rr r r ,us t bc thc pert ie l set t l insof

langurrgcPrrct iccs, f l i rnguagi rrgry '1-rg1;plci th c l i f fercr) tiur l luxgc ackgrount ls,

andunt lerccr t r r iu oci r t l i rcurnst l lnces.

The langurrg i r rgf creolespcakers rrkcs l i i icrent crr turcsronr thci r ent i rc i r r -

guist iccpcrto i rc. -hcyot terrnrovecloscr o the stanclerci ,pcaking vhat inguists

refer o its rrn rlcro/r,c/. )thcr tiures, their lanuueginu hrrs rn<lrc ci. lturcsof th e

creoletsel f , eacl ing iugLr istso refcr to th is var icty . ts l t t rs i lcL- t he choiceof

words o clescr ibehis rrngrragingosi t ions l rc acrolect rs upcr ior o the basi lect .

Butviewed ronr thc pcrspcct ivc f the s; rcaker, rncl ot f ronr rhe larrguagetscl f ,

creole-speekcrshooscand l r lcnr i caturcs rorrr hci r cnt i rc l ingrr ist ic cpcrtorrr ' ,

maki rrghei r arrgrregi r rgrolc resl - ronsivco st rrnd, rr r l r crcolc ci r tLrreslcpcni l i r rg

on thei rc<lnrrnunicat i ' , 'cntent rncl ts funct iorr .

Language n school

Academic angudgc

I f our concepf iorr f l r rnguagc as bcen const ructc( | . l f tcn hrough soci< l -pol i t icrr l

rather h: rn inguist ic r i ter ia. hen rhe arrguagc f school , spccia l ly h i r t we havc

learrneclo call thc "strrnclarrlrcrrt lcn't icangurrge,"s th e ultinratccrcrtf ior.t. oulrlrrs

(2005:21.5) c ief iues tanclard rs " i i prest igevar iety of languauc,provic l ingawritten nstitutionalizecl orrl as a rcfcrcnce orrn for such purposcs s l,urgr-rrrge



36 Bilingualism and Edwcation

teachingan d the media." Wright (2004:54) says: A standard anguage s th e means

by which large groups becomeand remain communities of communication. The

norm is decidedan d codified by a central group, disseminatedhrough the institu-

tions of the state such as education and then usage s constantlypoliced and users

dissuaded rorn divergent practices,both formally and informally." Standardiza-

tion occurs by fixing and regulatingsuch featuresas the spell ingand the grammar

of a language rr dictionariesand grammar books which are then used or prescriptive

teachingof the language.What is important is to recognize hat standardization sno t an inherent characteristicof language,but an "acquired or deliberatelyan d

art i6cia l ly mposedcharacter ist ic" Romaine,1994:84). The term of ten used n

opp<lsit ior.rcl standard s "verr-urcular:"he local languagepractices.

Th e standard that is taught in school is sometimesnot spoken anywhere. Fo r

example,a Moroccan native speakerof Tamazight (Berber)tt ' "y also be fluent n

col loclu ia lMoroccan Arabic. In school ,however,he is taught to read and wr i te

only in modern standardArabic (MSA). Furthermore, o read he Qu'ran, as wel l

as to pray, this Moroccan usesclassicalArabic.

It is importrlut to emphasiz e hat the resultsof the c()nstnlctionof a standard

language re very rea[ . n schools, ven bi l ingualones, t is the standard anguage

that is valued for teaching, earning,and esp ecially classess hat is being earned.

Schoolspa y a lot of attention to th e teachirrgof language tself, sometimes o the

interrral mecharricshirt characteriz e he language what some call "grirmmar" -

other t imes o its us e n meaningfulcontexts,especially n readingand writ ing. But

language s central in school because t is also the means hrough which teaching

and learr . r ing ccurs. () f tent imes,however, th is use of language n school , as

cont ro l ledby the teacherand l i rn i ted o what is c<lnsideredthe standard," ras

litt le to do with errcouraging hildren's ntellectLralnquiry and creativity or with

childrcn's anl_l,uaging.he abil ity to use he standard anguage s a developmental

g<la l f educat ion, L l t cst r ict inghc languaging f studeuts raysevcrelyi rn i t l - re i r

comurunic:rt ive nd inte lcctual p()tenti:11,lnd their possibil it ies f beconringbetter

educated.

Strrr.rdardiz.rrt ior.rnd literacy re ntrinsicallvinked,bcc:ruse,sRolnaineha spointed

ollt, "the acquisit i<ln i l i tcracypresupposeshe cxistence f a codifiedwritten stancl-

ard, and standardizationdependson tl.reexistcnceof a written forn-rof language"(1994:86). Becausei tcrrcy re l ieson the standard, he standarclanguage tscl f s

tarrght explicit ly in school, and it certdinly needs <tbc taught. Wright (2004: 44 )

ha s pointed oLlt hat "a standard s more easily acquired han an in-group varietl '

that is not cocl i f ied. "We:rre not quest ioninghe teaching f a standard anguage

in school ;wi t l rout i ts acquis i t ion, anguage r inor i tychi ldrenwi l l cc lnt i r rueo fai l

and will no t have equrrl access o resollrcesand opportuniries. But we have to

recognize ha t an exclusiue ocus on the standard variety keepsor.rt ther languag-

in g prrrcticesha t ar e children'sauthentic inguistic derrtityexpression. n Chapters

1. 1and 14 we will tunr to how to teach he standarcl anguage n l inguisticallyarrd

cul tura l ly re levantways, and in Chapter 12 we suggestways of bui ld ing on the

langurrg ing f b i l ingualchi ldren n classrooms.

Tb e exclusit,e seclf ar tand,rrcl ariery cl r school ha s mportant irnplications orbil ingual education.As we shall see, he languagepracticesof immigrants,bu t also



themeans

. Thethenstitu-

andusers

ardiza-

glammar

tlve

zation s

tely an d

used n

. Fo r

fluent n

andwrite

as well

a standard

language

learned.

to the

a r " -t . But

teacl"ring

school, s

" has

or with

rental

l imit heir

insbetter

has ointed

iffen tand-

languageitself s

(2004: 4)varlety

language

to fail

have to

languag-

InChapters

I lyandon the

tions forbu t also


of Indigenous eoplesan d other minorit ized and Deaf communities.are influencedby contactwith dorninant languagepractices,as well as by the exclusionof homelanguage ractices ro m all formal domains,an d most especiallv chools, ometimesfo r generaticlns. s a result, th e minorit ized larrguage racricesof the holre oftelhave itt le to do with the standard n-rinority anguage aught in school.

Withouta

lo t of caution, he school's nsistence n usingonl1, he standardvarietyof the homelanguagean be detrimental,and may even aggravate he linguistic nsecurity ha tmanyminoritv speakers eel.

Characteristics

Skutnabb-Kangasrt rc lToukomaa (1976), working rvi th Finnish inrnigranrs 1Sweden, rclPosedhat there s a differencebetween he way in which language sused n acadernic asks:rncl n cr>nversation nc l ntimacy. Tl'resurfttcefLuencry>evidentn cclnversationalangu:rges rlclst often suglp<lrted y cues hirr have itt leto do wi th langu: rgetsel f .For cxrrmple,n p laying bal l in a p layground, hi ldrenwi l lgesturc, < l int , rskqLlest ior ls,cpeat he sanre ommancls, se hei r bgcly, hei rfaces,heir l.rancls.n writrng t( ) \onrconc wc knclw intim:rtely, much c:rn be leftunsaid ecat tsehe t lc: rn i t tg s of ten carr ieclbv what we knorv abggt the otherpersol l 'n Persot ta l ia loguc,wc of ten ask the othcr person o repei r t , o clar i fy,and o provic le tn cxat t tp lc.Cr-rnrrn insl9 l3 b) has cal led his use ef langgi rge

langu:rgerilcticcs ha t arre Lrpprlrtedrv rrrcaningfr-rlrrterpersonal nd situati6lalcues "coutextual izedi rnsuage." l rntcxtual ized languagc, upportedby para-linguistic ttcs, is what one rrscs or htsic intarperstntol 'ommttnicatipz, whrrtCum m insa l l s B I ( . S . "

Contextual upp()r t , unt t l ins (2000)expla ins, an becxternt l .having 6 cf t rwi thaspects f t l lc inpr-rt tself, as in c rrseswhere larrguagc sc rrl l<lws clr redunclarrcy,and s spokenclear ly.Bt r t coutextualsupport c: rn also be internal ,having o clowi th heexper ier tces,rr tcrcsts, : . rncliot iv i r t i< lnsl iaf inter loci r tors ave.The nrorestudents nttw an d ttnclerstrrnd,he e:rsie it is frlr t l.rem o rnakc sense f acirdemiclanguage.i r rcehcrc is i r r renal support r>rurderst i rncl inghe nessages.

To c<lmpletech<lo lasks,arrc l speciar l lysscsslncntasks,anothcrdi f ferentsetof language ki l ls s rreedecl . tudcnts n scl . rool eed <l be able to lse lauguage

wi thout rr lyext ra l ingLr ist icupport , n rvays hi l t arc vcry ci i f f -erentrorn thc wayin which wc Llsc irnguagemost of th c time in real l ife. That is , dec<tntextualizedlanguages what is neeclecln orclcr to participrlte in th e ll(E/lRF (lnit iati6n-Response-F,vah"ratiorr/Feedback)yclc that is scl comnron in classr1;11miscgurse,in order o read texts that are devoid of ;ricturesarndother cues, )r texts that ar eabout hingsstudentskntlrv nothirrgabor-rt.)ec()ntexrualizeclanguage s also whatstudents eed n ttrder to write th e academicessrlyshat require an unknown audi-ence ith whotn conttnrtnic;,tt iclrrs important, :rnd in taking nrult iple-choice eststhat orceonly on e ilnswer. Ir r speirkingabclut he neecl or thesedecclntextualizedlanguage ki l ls , cu 'mins ( 19s1b) cal ls them cogt i t iue Academic LangudgeProficiency CALP).

cummins (2000: ch. 2) posits ha t academic anguage,both oral and wriften, is

associatedit h higher-order hinking, includinghyporhesizing, valurrring,nferring,generalizing,redicting,or classifying.And yet, (,-ummins rgues ha t cALp is not



38 Bilinpudlism and Edttcation

superior o BICS,and that developmentally hey are not separate ut develop

within a matrix of social nteraction . A nrajor goal of schooling s to expand

use of decontextualized irnguage hat cl.raracterizescademic egisters, ut to

so , (lummins tells us, social interact ion and the contextualizat ion of academic

gr . r l lge r : lc f iccs s most c \sent in l .

Redsons

ln clrder to ref lect on why thc standard lar.rguage s ir lrposed in schools, we havf irst describe ro w certain languagesor specificvarietics ar e forced on partic

groups. t is obvi< lushat more powcrfu l gr()ups r. l rposehei r l i rnguage n the

powerfu l .This is thc c i lse, or exanrple, f S: i rn is nd Rorna n Fin landwho h

to learn F i r rn ish,whcreasFirr r rs o not l reeclo spcak he ot l rer arrguages

in thei r terr i tory. Sinr i lar ly, h i ldren rr rhe Uni ted Statesdo not havc ro l

Spanish r Ohi rrese, herci rs J.S..at i r ro, lh incsc, r Nat ive American hi ldre

expected <l errrn rngl ish.

In s<l t le ount r ies, h i lc l rcrr rc scho<l lecln: r languagc p<lken nly by a po

f r-r l n inor i ty wi th in the c()unt ry, ' rnd < l tby the rnajor i tyof speakers. his is

casc, r l r cxarnple, f Hai t i , wherc unt i l recent ly hi lc l renwcrc sch<l< l ledole

French, l th<lLrghnly the el i tc were French-sperrkers,i th rnostHai t iansspea

Hrrit iarr ircole.This ecluceti<lnrrlracticcprivileged hoscwh o spokeFrenchar ho

severely ur ta i l ing cdLrcat ional ; lportLrni r icsor t l r< lsewho werc sch<lo led

languagc hcy cl ic l rot understancl .. ikewisc, n nranyAfr ican anclAsian coun

cluringcolonial f irles, eclucrrtionoo k pllcc <lnly rr the colonial rrrrguage,cluc

an i r tc l igcn<lusl i te ( ) scrvt : s brokcrsbctwcerrhe colonia lpowcr ru ld he Indi

or.tspopulrrt iotr, rrttclellsLlring hat orrly a fe w becrtnreeclLrc:rtcd.he ;lracot t t i t tuesoclay n nr i r r ryAf r ican countr ics,gr . r r r r r tnteeinghat thc powcr sta

thc hrrncls f the Incl igenousl i tc.( l< l rson 200 ) points to how prcjucl icc gainstuscrs<l f n<l r r -st rurdardar i

of a langLraees as olclas hc history<lf anguauetsclf. lo r cxirrnple,he Bible cco

how prol rut tc i r r t io t tf thc worcl "Sl r ibbolerh"wrrs rscclo d ist inguishhe conqu

F.phle inr i tes, l rosc c l i r r lcuts. rckc. l rn /J/ s ound, fronr the v ictor ious i i lcad

Whclrcvcran l rphrrr i rn i rcr iccl ( ) prrss or rr ( i i lcrrc l i tc , t l . rcnrcn of ( l i lcad a

h i n r , ' A r e y o l r i u r E p h r r r i n r i t c ? ' l i e r e p l i c d , ' N o , ' t h e y s a i c l , ' A l l r i g h t"Shibbolcth. " ' I f he srr ic l ,Si [ rbolcfh, '

becausc c coulc ln() t pron()uncehe r ,

corrcct ly, hey seizedr i rnand ki l lcc lh inret tl rc < l rds f thc. f< l rdan."or ty- two h

srrncl .p l . r r r r i rn i tescrc kr l lcc l t that t i rne" (Book of . f c lges 2: .5-6) .' l 'h i l rk i r rg

about rhe s i turr t ion < l f whrr t hes becn cal lccl Af r icarr Amer

Vcrnrrcular .ngl ishAAVtr) or F lborr icsrrs nst ruct ivcn th is rcgarcl . l thoughm

sch<; larssceespecia l ly. r rbov 1972)htve clear lyshown that AAVIr is logical

rcgul r t r ,and th i r t i rs grr tnrnrrr t icrr lnd phonologic i r l hrrr r rcter ist icsannot l tc

crtuseof poor rrcadcrnicpcrf<lrrl iurce, he fcrttures hat characrerizc l'ris var

contiltuc to lrc stignratizecl. ,ven n schools vith r.nanyAfricrtn Antcrican teac

artd l r ncighborhoocls l rerenrost t rc Af r ican Anrer icrrns,ln ly an L,ngl ish t

rrrd is ircceptcd, levelopecl,rncluscd in rlssessnrent.hc wiciespread riirsaga

Iron-strrnclrrclarieties f l inglish, spccially iasag:rinstcaturcs ssociated ith AA<rrL, l ronicsrasnruch o clowir l ' r acisrn, s shown n the rcscarch f Baugl r 19



jointly

expand he

bu t to do

demican-

wehave cl

part icuar

on he lcss

u'ho have

present

to learn

children re

bya power-

This s the

sole ly n

ns peaking

at h()rre.

rd ir.r a

n countnes.

, eclucating

the ndigen-

The practice

stlrys l ll

rd var iet ies

Bibleecor-rnts

th e onclueed( i i lcacl i tes.

Gilcrcl sl<ed

All right, saythe word

y-t\ \r() hou-

n American

ug h rnany

iskrgicrrl nd

cannot e rhe

this virriety

n telrchers

Engl ishtand-

biasagarinst

rvith AAVEBaugh1997).

Langwaging and Education 39

This acism hat is associatedwith l irrrguages wl'ratTove Skutnabb-Kzrngas2000)

has ermed l inguic ism."

There are many other cxamples n'orldwide of using language o limit educa-

t ional nd occupat ional pportuni t ies.Vlakoni nd Pennycook 2007)propose har

when he "constructecl" African languag;es ,ere introdr-rcednt o local commun-

it iesas official languages, hey actually accentuated ocial diffcrences, ince rhey

couldonly be acquired hrough forrrrrl educatiorrand no t everyonchacl access o

school . ikewise,Pennycook 2002)has shown h<xv anguage se n educat ion n

colonia l ong Kong were responsi l r lcor creat ing doci le" people, b le < lcooper-

ate n thei r own explo i t i r t i< ln. oots (1999)has providedexamplcs f l row hear ing

educators : rve nainta inecl l re i r col r t r ( ) l over Dcaf conlnuni t ies by, imposing

signing ans. ticcnto (2003) ha sdert'tonstratcd'rr>rvolicies tgainst i l ingual educa-

tion n thc UnitcclStatesnrrryhave uruch o cl<l vith controll ing the srarc's rowing

bi l ingual isrnrndcnsur ing hat opp()r tuni t icscnrain n the harrds f rnclnol inguals.

In thesameway, ( iarc ia (200-3), larc ia nd Menken (2006) and Menken (2008)

have uggestcclhat the qr 'wrrrg insi \ tcncen thc t rse 'of t r rncl r r rc lr i t ten Hngl ish n

high-stakes ssessmentn thc [JrritcclStates hirs to do ',vith gatc-kccping; ha t

is, he abi l i ty to cont ro l who gocs forwrrrc l , ncl ensur ing hat only those wh<r

can wr i te F,ngl ish at ivcl \ , ,ancl wi thout any featur-es f l r r r rguagc ontact , cal t

access igher educrtf iorr rrt l prrofcssional r>.sit ions.rl i/rittenstarrclarcltrrglish n

U.S. choolassesslnentss increasingly sed o creatccl i f icrcnccs enveen rono-

l ingualsncl i l ingualswhich t rc hen usedasgrr tc-kcc1' r ingrcchrrn isrnsor promo

t ion,high-school racluat iot r , ncl col lcgccnt rr rnce for nrore on asscssnrcnt ,ce

Chaptcr .5) .

Theohscss i , r r tv i th , t t t g t r . tg r '. t t t ' r t o r i t ' s , : t sc l l r t s l t t ' s choo l ' sr r s i s r c r reen r r s i ng

only the standarcl "o teach, crrrn, nd r lssessras herrmuch to c lowi th thc con-

cept f gouernntclttdlity s proposccl .t l 'Foucrrrrlt 19 9 ). Fotrcault <lcuscs n how

languagerr lcr iccs rcsLt l l tc" thc rv i tys r i ' "vhich ar igurrges usecl . r rdcstabl ishlanguageicrarchicsn lvhich sonrc rrngurrgcs,)r sonrewi lys of usi r rg angurrgc,

aremore valucd than ot l rcrs.This hrrs o bc interprctedwi th in thc f r r r rncwork

of "hegernorry"levclopct l y Antonio ( i ranrsci 1971) which cxpla inshow peoplc

acqu iesceo inv i s i b l c u l t u ra l p ( )we r .F . r i kso r r1996 : 4 . i ) c l e f i r r cshegen ron i c

practices"-ts routinc irctiolts .rncl nexanrineclrclicfs hrrt rlrec()nson.lnIwith thecultural ystenr lf ncanitrg nc lontology within which it n'rakcs ense o trrkecertrrin

act ions,nt i re l l 'wi th<lut r r r lcvolcntntent , hat norrct l . rc lcssystenr i r f ica l l r . ' l i rn i thclife hancestf ntetn[rcrs lfstigrnetizedroups." ()ur r<lr-rt incanguage rlrctices econrc

"regulatory" lcchauistnswl-rich rrcorrscirlr-rslyrcatccirtcgories f erclusiorr.Thus.

ourdiscursiveract iccs rc onc of the rrost obvi< lus xrrrnplcsf hegenronyn which

weal l , and especia l ly ducrr tors, ar t ic ipate.

As the preceding ecr i ( ) l ls avc s l rowrr , )ur conceptual izat i< lnl f language s

often imiting and cloesn()t reflcct fh e colnplcx wrrys n lvhich peoplc ldnguagc.

As far as b i l ingual cducat ion s concernecl ,t is csscnt ia l hat ef for ts be rnadc

to incorporatehese ei r tures f pcople 's arrguagingn pr>l icy, urr iculum, ancl

inst ruct ional lanning. I t is rnost i rnportant tr l underst rrnclhe iurportant r ( ) le

differentangurrge arietiesancl anguagepractices, ncluding pidgins rrnd creoles,haven educat ion.



40 Bilingualism and Edr'tcatiort

Conclusion

l ,anguage s an important aspect,although by no means th e most important'

.u,rrid.i i, lg th e topic of bil ingual education. Because anguarges so familiar,

operate with a seriesof assumptionsabout language ha t have to be questio

in order to think :rbout bil ingulrl educzrtion. n this chapter, we have conside

how our conceptionof star-rdard:rnguage as beenconstructed hrotrgh sometim

oppressive ractices, nd other times discursivepractices.Through thesepractic

-"r,y ,rf us have become convinced of the naturalnessof the standard angu

and of i ts neut r i r l i ty .

In this chapterwe cleconstructedanguage s r conceptSoas o enableus to und

stand ts power and potential as a discursive ool. In so dcling,we have questio

practices h:lt on the surface seem n:rtural, lrut that have the effect of exert

control an d restrictin€i pportunity. Thirt langttage s a social construction, ink

to the col tst ruct i ( ) l t f the rrat ion-stafe,s a fact . But that language, s socia l ly

st ructed, as real mpl icat ions or chi ldren's ducat ion s a most nlportxnt rea

Despi tc he changeso our concept ion f nat ion-statess a resul tof g l< lbal iza

language rr schocll ontirlues o opcrate nostly as t l.rrrsn th e past.distanced r

th e real ways in wli ich children languagc.

Wc reirnirgine artguage s langu:rge ractices' arrgLr:rgings a rcs()urce f iminari<rn,anguagingwithout bridlcs, anguagingwithor-rtprejudices, nits full re

r>fntodesartd mcarrings ha t are supportcdby technology oclay. Wefocushere

r>r-ranguagcper se but on the nrr-rlt iple iscursive ractices hat constitutewhat

call lrnguagilg. Th c langurtgc se n bilingtralschools s cletermir"redlostly by st

that cont r< l lwhethcr al l chi ldrenare t () be educarecln c lne : rnguage r the ot

6r i1 many,9r rvhether he children's anguagings to be valued.But bil ingualsch

fhirr ac t ()11heir potenrirt l o lte trirnsforntativemtlst build on th e children'sco

plcx langr-ragingo also clevclop he languagillgpracticesof scho<lls, hat we h

learrrcd o cal l "standi rrdacadenr icrrnguage."

In Chapters.3and 4, wc rurr l ro exenr in i | rghe c()ncept l f b i l ingual isrnts

changilg ernphasiso a ntore sociopolit ical evel n Chapter4, but alwaysconsi

i , rg r ih, . ,gu" l isnrn rhe i rr rerrc lat ionshipreatedby l rnguaging,and the agencthosewho language.

Qucstions fo r Reflection

L What does t nrean or languageso have

2. How have global iz i r t ion nd technology

guage s used?

beenconstructed? iv e someexamp

inrpactedon the ways in which

3. What does anguagingmean?How does t

4. What is academic anguagean d what ar e

differ from a language?

some of its characteristics?X/h

i ts ro le in schools?

5. Discuss language" an d "dialect" as presented n this chapter. Give examof i ts socia lconst ruct ion.



unportant, n

familiar,we

questioned

considered

someumes

practlces,language

us o under-

questioned

of exerting

ion, inked

sociallyor-r-

t reality.

globalization,

from

of imag-its ull rcalia

hereno t

what we

by states

or he other

schools

s com-

we have

itself,

consider-

agency f

examples.

which an-

? What is

examples

Languaging and Education 41,

5. !7hat ar e pidgins and creoles?Do they have a role in bil ingual education?

7. Reflecton your personal experienceswith language practices. {/hat factors

influence our decision o language n one way or another?

FurtherReading

Corson,D. (2001). l,anguage Diuersity and Educcttion. Lawrence Erlbaun.r,Mahwah, NJ.

Coulmas, . (200-5).Sctciolinguistics.The Study of Speakers' Choice. Cambridge University

Press, ambridge.

Graddol,D. (2006). Englisb Next. \Yhy Global English May Mean the End of "English as

a Foreign anguage.'TheBrit ish Council, London. Availableat: www.brit ishcouncil.orgy'

learning-reseirrch-english-next.pdf

Makoni, S., and Pennycook, A. (2007). Disinuenting and Reconstituting Languages.

Mult i l ingual Matters, Clevedon,UK .

Maurais, ., and Morris, M.A. (eds.) (2003). Languages n a Globdlising Wctrld. Cambridge

UniversityPress,Carnbridge.

Miihlhdusler,P. (19961. Lingrtistic Ecology. Language Change and Linguistic Imperialism

in tbe Pacif ic Rcgion.Routledge,Lorrclon.

Romaine,S. (1994). Language in Society: Atr Introduttiort to Sot:ktlinguistics. Oxford

UniversityPress,Oxford. Secondedn. 2001.

languaging and education garcia

Documents