Language Policy

Volume 22, Issue 1-2, 2023

Language Policy（SSCI一区，2022 IF：1.6，排名：75/194）2023年第1-2期共刊文18篇, 其中研究性论文10篇，勘误2篇，地区针对性语言政策6篇。研究论文涉及成人移民语言教育，家庭语言政策，小学语言教育落实情况，语言政策与意识形态等。欢迎转发扩散！

往期推荐：

刊讯｜SSCI 期刊《语言政策》2022年第3-4期

刊讯｜SSCI 期刊《语言政策》2022年第1-2期

刊讯｜SSCI 期刊《语言政策》2021年第4期

目录

Issue 1

Articles

■ Re-orienting to language users: humanizing orientations in language planning as praxis, by Yalda M. Kaveh, Pages 1-23.

■ The ambivalent role of Urdu and English in multilingual Pakistan: a Bourdieusian study, by Hina Ashraf, Pages 25-48.

■ Correction to: The ambivalent role of Urdu and English in multilingual Pakistan: a Bourdieusian study, by Hina Ashraf, Pages 49-49.

■ Motivations for service provision spectrum: needs assessments and language policy approaches, by Kathleen Easlick, Pages 51-71.

■ Amid signs of change: language policy, ideology and power in the linguistic landscape of urban Rwanda, by Tove Rosendal, Jean de Dieu Amini Ngabonzizal, Pages 73-94.

■ Anglonormativity in Norwegian language education policy and in the educational trajectories of immigrant adolescents, by Ingrid Rodrick Beiler, Pages 95-117.

■ Mekonnen Alemu Gebre Yohannes: Language Policy in Ethiopia: The Interplay between Policy and Practice in Tigray Regional State, by Merih Welay Welesilassie, Pages 119-121.

■ Subhan Zein: Language Policy in Superdiverse Indonesia, by Susanah, Pages 123-125.

■ Piotr Romanowski: Family Language Policy in the Polish Diaspora: A Focus on Australia, by Sviatlana Karpava, Pages 127-129.

■ Correction to: Editorial introduction: a historical overview of the expanding critique(s) of the gentrification of dual language bilingual education, by M. Garrett Delavan, Juan A. Freire, Kate Menken, Pages 131-131.

Issue 2

Articles

■ Language policy at an abortion clinic: linguistic capital and agency in treatment decision-making, by Ella van Hest, July De Wilde, Sarah Van Hoof, Pages 133-153.

■ Policy formation for adult migrant language education in England: national neglect and its implications, by James Simpson, Ann-Marie Hunter, Pages 155-178.

■ Family language policy in retrospect: Narratives of success and failure in an Indian–Iranian transnational family, by Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi, Mona Hosseini, Pages 179-200. 

■ Examining the implementation of language education policies in mainstream primary schools, by Marieke Vanbuel, Kris Van den Branden, Pages 201-222.

■ "What is language for us?": Community-based Anishinaabemowin language planning using TEK-nology, by Paul J. Meighan, Page223-253.s 

■ Bruna Di Sabato and Bronwen Hughes: Multilingual Perspectives from Europe and Beyond on Language Policy and Practice, by Liubov Darzhinova, Pages 255-257.

■ David Cassels Johnson, and Eric J. Johnson: The Language Gap: Normalizing Deficit Ideologies, by Deborah Chua, Pages 259-261.

■ István Csernicskó: Ukrainian multilingualism: Two sides of a coin. Méry ratio / Foundation for minorities – pro Minoritate, 2022, 1–156 pp., Hb, 3060 ft ISBN 978-615-6284-21-1, by Vilmos Gazdag, Adalbert Barany, Pages 263-265.

第1期摘要

Re-orienting to language users: humanizing orientations in language planning as praxis

Yalda M. Kaveh, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287-1811, USA

Abstract The field of language policy and planning (LPP) has increasingly expanded its focus beyond legislative measures and macro-level policies toward understanding the power of social actors and their interpretation, appropriation, and creation of language policies in societies. This article aims to advance LPP theory and research by offering a critical and decolonial lens for conceptualizing and analyzing language policy in research, education, and language planning. This critical lens expands on one of the most influential LPP models: Ruiz's (1984) framework for Orientations in Language Planning. Ruiz's framework was proposed as a "meta-model" for language planning specialists to examine and advocate for new policies. This article invites researchers of language use in society to consider an epistemological shift from defining languages with fixed orientations, such as problem, resource, and right, toward looking at the intersectional roles of the listening and speaking subjects in defining the orientation(s) to languages in various contexts. This conceptual framing situates LPP research and critical studies of language in society in the context of broader critical theories, including intersectionality, human as praxis, humanization, and decolonizing research from ownership to answerability. The goal is to forge humanizing language policy research that is responsive to issues in our immediate and broader global contexts.

Key words Language policy, Orientations in language planning, Language rights, Human as praxis, Intersectionality, Humanization, Decolonizing research, Answerability

The ambivalent role of Urdu and English in multilingual Pakistan: a Bourdieusian study

Hina Ashraf, Department of Linguistics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

Abstract Pakistan, one of the eight countries comprising South Asia, has more than 212.2 million people, making it the world's fifth most populous country after China, India, USA, and Indonesia. It has also the world's second-largest Muslim population. Eberhard et al. (Ethnologue: languages of the world, SIL International, 2020) report 77 languages used by people in Pakistan, although the only two official languages are Urdu and English. After its Independence from the British colonial rule in 1947, it took much deliberation for the country to make a shift from its monolingual Urdu orientation to a multilingual language policy in education in 2009. This entailed a shift from the dominant Urdu language policy for the masses (and English exclusively reserved for elite institutions), to a gradual and promising change that responded to the increasing social demand for English and for including regional languages in the curriculum. Yet English and Urdu dominate the present policy and exclude regional non-dominant languages in education that themselves are dynamic and unstable, and restructured continually due to the de facto multilingual and plurilingual repertoire of the country. Using Bourdieu's (Outline of a theory of practice Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1977a, The economics of linguistic exchanges. Soc Sci Inform 16:645–668, 1977b, The genesis of the concepts of habitus and field. Sociocriticism 2:11–24 1985, Language and symbolic power Polity Press, Cambridge, 1991) conceptualization of habitus, this study analyzes letters to the editor published between 2002–2009 and 2018–2020 in a leading English daily of Pakistan. The analysis unveils the linguistic dispositions that are discussed in the letters and their restructuring through market forces, demonstrating a continuity between the language policy discourse and public aspirations. The findings also indicate the ambivalences towards Urdu and English in relation to nationalistic ideologies, modernity and identity.

Key words Multilingual education policy, Habitus, Pakistan, Letters to the editor

Motivations for service provision spectrum: needs assessments and language policy approaches

Kathleen Easlick, Faculty of Letters, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Abstract This paper examines the role of language policy and needs assessments in the provision of public services to regional minority and immigrant language speakers in the UK and Finland. Semi-structured interviews with service providers in Helsinki, Rovaniemi, Manchester, and Cardiff revealed how language policy and language needs are conceptualised differently for particular language groups. The paper introduces the Motivations for Service Provision Spectrum, which illustrates the interconnected nature of language policy, practice, and discourse. This model maps how individual service providers may draw from policy and needs assessment data to facilitate or resist multilingual practices within public service provision. The typologies of policy included in the model construct and frame the public sector environments in which local policy providers exercise their agency. The different policy approaches and needs assessment practices are two salient aspects of local policy actor decision-making. By comparing the provision of services to regional minority languages to that of immigrant languages in the UK and Finland, the study reveals how institutional actors interpret, enact, and explain service provision in increasingly diverse and multilingual settings.

Key words Language policy, Public services, Immigrant languages, Minority languages, Needs assessments

Amid signs of change: language policy, ideology and power in the linguistic landscape of urban Rwanda

Tove Rosendal, Department of Languages and Literatures, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

Jean de Dieu Amini Ngabonziza, Centre for Modern Languages, University of Kigali (UoK), Kigali, Rwanda

Abstract In this paper we explore the nexus of language policy, ideology and power in the linguistic landscape of urban Rwanda. In post-genocide Rwanda, English has been promoted and gained status. This has led to an increased usage of English on shop signs in the streets of Kigali and other towns in Rwanda at the expense of both French and Kinyarwanda. Unique quantitative language data documented in streets before 2008 are in this study compared to data collected in 2018, in the same streets. This forms the background for analysis of official discourse, targeting language policy changes, especially after the 2008 decision to appoint English as the language of administration as well as the medium of instruction throughout the educational system from grade 1 on. This decision was made despite the fact that Rwanda has a national language, Kinyarwanda, known by 99.4 per cent of the population. The analysis shows that political aspects of language policy decisions are downplayed. Officially, both discursively and in practice, the Rwandan government, that is the English speaking elite in power, legitimize their decisions by pretending that imposing English is an inevitable, pragmatic and rational measure for economic development. This narrative reveals ideas about inherent qualities of specific languages while simultaneously discarding others. Additionally, in public discourse all four official languages are equal. Reality is different. In a society where the status language is only acquired through education and used as medium of instruction, power differences and socioeconomic inequalities are neglected and obscured.

Key words Rwanda, Language policy, English, Discourse, Linguistic landscape, Power

Anglonormativity in Norwegian language education policy and in the educational trajectories of immigrant adolescents

Ingrid Rodrick Beiler, Department of Primary and Secondary Teacher Education, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway; Department of Teacher Education and School Research, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Abstract In the Nordic countries, policy debates about English often highlight the threat of domain loss for national languages, but the high status of English may also have a differential impact on people in Nordic societies. This article investigates a policy gap in Norwegian upper secondary education, whereby an advanced English subject requirement may hinder graduation for immigrant adolescents with little previous English instruction, despite English not being the medium of education in Norway. The aim of the study is to examine the impact of the upper secondary English requirement and of sheltered instruction as a local policy solution for such students. I use nexus analysis (Hult, 2015) to analyze ethnographic data from one upper secondary school that created an ad hoc sheltered English class. Data include field notes, classroom video and audio recordings, language portraits, and interviews with one school leader, one teacher, and six students. I draw on decolonial theory (e.g., García et al., 2021; Santos, 2007), notably Anglonormativity (McKinney, 2017), to trace discursive, interactional, and personal policy scales. I found that the sheltered class reflected discourses of integration and Anglonormativity, but nonetheless offered greater affordances for participation than a mainstream English class. Furthermore, comparing the emphasis on English remediation with students’ broader repertoires surfaced possibilities for reframing students as resourceful multilingual learners. I discuss policy options that might better address underlying issues of epistemic justice, compared to solutions limited to increasing students’ proficiency in languages of power like English.

Key words English teaching, Immigrant students, Sheltering, Anglonormativity, Decoloniality, Norway

第2期摘要

Language policy at an abortion clinic: linguistic capital and agency in treatment decision-making

Ella van Hest, Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

July De Wilde, Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

Sarah Van Hoof, Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

Abstract This paper investigates an abortion clinic's procedural choices regarding the management of linguistic diversity. It focuses in particular on how language serves as capital for clients' agency in decision-making regarding their abortion treatment. Based on linguistic-ethnographic fieldwork in a Flemish abortion clinic, we analyse the clinic's institutional language policy, which states that clients should be able to speak Dutch, English or French in order to be eligible for a medical abortion—the alternative to a surgical abortion. We show how direct and smooth communication is considered a condition to ensure safety during the medical abortion treatment. We also discuss how, against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, the practical reorganisation of the clinic has led to more autonomy and empowerment for some clients, while it reinforced the already existing inequality for others. Finally, we discuss the clinic's struggles with and lack of reflection on language support services. We conclude that the case of the abortion clinic can be considered as one of exclusive inclusion, and suggest that a higher awareness of language support and a critical rethinking of the safety procedure could strengthen this clinic further in its endeavour to help women confronted with an unwanted pregnancy.

Key words Abortion care, Multilingualism, Linguistic capital, Agency, Safety, Exclusive inclusion

Policy formation for adult migrant language education in England: national neglect and its implications

James Simpson, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Hong Kong

Ann-Marie Hunter, York St John University, York, UK

Abstract This article is about current policy in the coordination of opportunities for adult migrants in England to learn English. People who move to a different country experience a need to learn the dominant language of their new environment, to support their settlement. A willingness to learn the language is a marker of social inclusion from a political perspective too: an insistence that migrants have an obligation to learn and use the language is a recurrent trope in political and media discourse. In the UK, language education for adult migrants focuses on the area of education known as ESOL, English for Speakers of Other Languages. Beyond the rhetoric, policy support for migrants’ learning of English across the UK is inconsistent: there is neither a UK-wide nor an England-specific strategy in policy to support access to ESOL. Where policy exists, it is formed at a local level in the absence of national direction. The aim of this paper is to consider how an important area of adult education appears to have little presence in national policy, and what the implications of this are, for practice. To achieve this, we first follow the trajectory of ESOL policy in England, considering why—despite attempts to address its coordination—there remains a lacuna. Second, we ask what the implications are of this policy gap for ESOL coordination in practice. Analysis of current policy and of interviews with key ESOL stakeholders suggests an enduring condition of fragmentation and lack of coordination to the detriment of students.

Key words Language education, English for speakers of other languages, ESOL, Coordination, Policy, Strategy

Family language policy in retrospect: Narratives of success and failure in an Indian–Iranian transnational family

Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi, Center for Multilingualism in Society Across the Lifespan (MultiLing), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Mona Hosseini, Department of Foreign Languages, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

Abstract In this study, we investigate family language policy in a transnational family through a collaborative autoethnography. Following the theoretical underpinnings of family language policy (Spolsky in J Multiling Multicult Dev 31:3–11, 2012), we present parental language beliefs, management, and practices in retrospect to shine a light on the long-term impact of the family's language policy on their daughter's linguistic development in heritage languages (i.e., Persian and Hindi) and English. The components of the family language policy in this cross-cultural transnational family are sketched in the second author's narratives of her experiences of multilingual childrearing and heritage language maintenance. We engage with, and critique, recent family language scholarship that apply postmodernist lens to examine families' translingual use of languages at home to get by their daily life, showing how having failed to set boundaries between the home/heritage languages and English over the past nine years has resulted in their child's predominant proficiency in English. We argue that such failure has its roots in parents' own past lived, and future imagined, experiences, as well as language ideologies that are polycentric and scaled, the consequences of which concern emotional, linguistic, cultural and social frictions across generations. Drawing on the narratives of success and failure in the family, we call for critical adoption of translingual frameworks in examining family language policy paying careful attention to the long-term impact of such practices at home on children's linguistic development.

Key words Autoethnography, Family language policy, Heritage language, Transnational families, Translingualism

Examining the implementation of language education policies in mainstream primary schools

Marieke Vanbuel, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Kris Van den Branden, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Abstract Recent studies in the field of language education policy (LEP) have emphasized the agency of educators in language policy implementation, which considerably influences the policy outcome. These studies, however, often focus on LEP measures for newcomers or ethnic minority students, and on the language used for instruction as the main LEP indicator. This study adopts an educational effectiveness framework in order to provide a more comprehensive view of the LEP measures that school teams deploy. By means of a multiple case study in six mainstream primary schools in Flanders (Belgium), it examines how language education policies are enacted in local school contexts. Focus group interviews were conducted with both teachers and school management teams. The results reveal conflicts between the official LEP and the interpretations of what LEP is and should be according to school team members, and between management team members and teachers within the same school. The rationale for the schools' enacted LEP, too, is built up from different argumentations that are not necessarily consistent with each other. The combination of these dynamics results in LEPs that either display none, one or – in one case only – both dimensions of what can be called an effective or strategic LEP. This study helps to understand how future policies can respond to local needs. By zooming in on local policy implementation, we were able to identify the difficulties that school teams struggle most with when implementing their LEPs.

Key words Language education policy, School policy, Policy implementation, Primary school

"What is language for us?": Community-based Anishinaabemowin language planning using TEK-nology

Paul J. Meighan, Department of Integrated Studies in Education, McGill University, McTavish Street, Montréal, Québec, Canada

Abstract Language planning and policy (LPP), as a field of research, emerged to solve the "problem" of multilingualism in newly independent nation-states. LPP's principal emphasis was the reproduction of one-state, one-language policies. Indigenous languages were systematically erased through top-down, colonial medium-of-instruction policies, such as in Canadian residential schools. To this day, ideologies and policies still privilege dominant classes and languages at the expense of Indigenous and minoritized groups and languages. To prevent further erasure and marginalization, work is required at multiple levels. There is growing consensus that top-down, government-led LPP must occur alongside community-led, bottom-up LPP. One shared and common goal for Indigenous language reclamation and revitalization initiatives across the globe is to promote intergenerational language transmission in the home, the community, and beyond. The affordances of digital and online technologies are also being explored to foster more self-determined virtual communities of practice. Following an Indigenous research paradigm, this paper introduces the TEK-nology (Traditional Ecological Knowledge [TEK] and technology) pilot project in the Canadian context. TEK-nology is an immersive, community-led, and technology-enabled Indigenous language acquisition approach to support Anishinaabemowin language revitalization and reclamation. The TEK-nology pilot project is an example of bottom-up, community-based language planning (CBLP) where Indigenous community members are the language-related decision-makers. This paper demonstrates that Indigenous-led, praxis-driven CBLP, using TEK-nology, can support Anishinaabemowin language revitalization and reclamation and more equitable, self-determined LPP. The CBLP TEK-nology project has implications for status and acquisition language planning; culturally responsive LPP methodologies; and federal, provincial, territorial, and family language policy.

Key words Anishinaabemowin, Technology, Language policy, Language planning, Indigenous language revitalization, Language reclamation

期刊简介

Language Policy is highly relevant to scholars, students, specialists and policy-makers working in the fields of applied linguistics, language policy, sociolinguistics, and language teaching and learning. The journal aims to contribute to the field by publishing high-quality studies that build a sound theoretical understanding of the field of language policy and cover a range of cases, situations and regions worldwide.  

《语言政策》与在应用语言学、语言政策、社会语言学和语言教学领域工作的学者、学生、专家和决策者高度相关。该期刊旨在通过发表高质量的研究为该领域做出贡献，这些研究建立了对语言政策领域的良好理论理解，并涵盖了全球范围内的案例、情况和地区。

A distinguishing feature of this journal is its focus on various dimensions of language educational policy. Language education policy includes decisions about which languages are to be used as a medium of instruction and/or taught in schools, as well as analysis of these policies within their social, ethnic, religious, political, cultural and economic contexts.  

该期刊的一个显着特点是它关注语言教育政策的各个方面。语言教育政策包括关于将哪些语言用作教学语言和/或在学校教授的语言，以及在其社会、种族、宗教、政治、文化和经济背景下对这些政策的分析。

官网地址：

https://www.springer.com/journal/10993/

推  荐

今日小编：墨色深

  审     核：心得小蔓

转载&合作请联系