Policy(2019)18:535–551/10.1007/s10993-018-9503-
5 ORIGINALPAPER Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationintothegapbetweenlanguagepracticesandlanguagepolicy MassimilianoSpotti1 ·SjaakKroon1·JinlingLi1 Received:6November2017/epted:14December2018/Publishedonline:2March2019©TheAuthor(s)2019 AbstractThispaperexplorestheintersectionofnewspeakersinconditionsofglobalisationledmobilityanditinvestigatestheimplicationsthephenomenamayhaveforlanguagepolicymaking.Itfirstdescribestwohistoricalphasesinlanguagepolicydevelopmentthatarecloselyrelatedtoasociolinguisticsofstability.Inthis,itcriticiseshowpresent-daylanguagepolicyisattachedtospecifictimeandspaceconstraintswhosefocusisabynowoutdatedconceptoflanguageandofspeakerasitsprescriptiveobjects—thusleadinginstitutionallanguagepoliciestonotbeing‘insync’withcontemporarynewspeakers’socio-andgeo-politicalmovementsanddevelopments.Thispropositionisillustratedintwocasestudies,bothlocatedintheNetherlandsanddealingwiththelanguagepracticesandconnectedpoliciesoftwotypesofnewspeakers.Thefirstcasedealswiththeexperiencesofasylumseekersbeingengagedwith‘techno-literacies’.ThatisasylumseekersbeingpartofICTassistedclassesforcivicintegrationthroughthelearningofDutch(newspeakersofanewlanguage,learningthroughnewmeansoflanguagelearning).ThesecondcasedealswithChinesestudentswhoarefullyproficientinDutch,attendinglanguageheritageclassesforlearningMandarinthroughbookbasedlessons(newspeakersofanoldlanguage,learningthrougholdmeansoflanguagelearning).Inbothcases,theobservedlanguagepracticesandmeta-pragmaticjudgementsoftheindividuallanguageuserselectthemasinitiatorsofbottom-upsociolinguisticchangethat,whileofferinggrassrootssolutionsforlocalchallenges,alsoplaysaroleaslocalevidenceforinforming-downlanguagepolicydevelopment. Keywords Newspeaker·Mobility·ICT·Ethnography·Languagepolicy·Dutch·Chineseheritagelanguageteaching·Asylumseekers·Civicintegration *MassimilianoSpottim.spotti@tilburguniversity.edu 1DepartmentofCultureStudies,Babylon–CenterfortheStudyofSuperdiversity,TilburgUniversity,5000LETilburg,TheNetherlands 13Vol.:(0123456789) 536 Introduction
M.Spottietal. Urgesh: LookatthisSir,lookatthisWassif: Thesearecoolbruv,thesearecoolUrgesh: IhaveseenthemonagigWassif: Yeahyeah,lookatthat,power,broderMax,purepower (Asylum2.0,fieldnotes14102013) Theabovequoteistakenfromthefieldworklognotesofaprojectaimedatinvestigatingwhatitmeanstobeanasylumseekerinanageofglobalization.ItsmaincharactersareUrgesh,ayoungBengaliasylumseekerengagedinwatchingaYouTubevideo,andWassif,anAfghaniasylumseeker,bothofthematanasylumseekingcenterinFlanders,theDutchspeakingpartofBelgium,theplacewherethesetwoyoungmenwishtostayoncetheirrefugeestatuswillbeapproved.Intheexcerpt,thesemenarementingthevideousingtheirownvarietiesofEnglish—astheBengalibandonthescreen,calledSultanaBibiana,playsacoverfromtheAmericanbandMetallicawhileperformingataconcertinIndonesia.Intheabovequote,severalaretheissuesatplay.First,asexemplifiedbythetotalabsenceofDutchintheexchange,wedonotseeanytraceofStatedrivenlanguagepoliciesbeingtakenonboardbythetwolanguageusers.Second,weseethattheinteractionathandimpliesthattheinterlocutorsareratherproficientlanguageusersofaninternationallanguage,i.e.English.Last,wecanalsoobservethattheyareproficienttechno-literatesinthattheyusetheasameansforessingpopculturecontent(KurversandSpotti2015). Thesituationpicturedaboveconfrontsuswithquestionsthatarefundamentalforthefieldoflanguagepolicy.First,isthereanypurposeorroomleftfordownlanguagepoliciesandlanguagepolicing(Blommaertetal.2009)incontextsthatarecharacterizedbyglobalizationledmobilityanditsplexity?
And,ifso,whatrolecanthesepolicieshaveinthelifeofthosepeople,whodonotnecessarilybelongtothesociolinguisticmainstream,inthattheyholdeitheranindigenousminoritybackgroundoraglobalizedmigratorybackground?
Last,whatdoesthissayaboutthenewlycoinedterm‘newspeaker’(O’Rourkeetal.2014,2015,2017;O’RourkeandRamallo2011)?
Isityetanotherincrementaltermfordescribingsociolinguisticphenomenacausedbyglobalizationledmobilityordoesithaveatransformativepotentialtoitself?
Thesequestions,wefeel,canbeofhelptowardtheformulationofarefreshinganswertowhatistheaimandobjectoflanguagepolicy,i.e.,whatconceptoflanguageitshouldactuallyembrace,whatitshouldwishtoachieve,andwhatkindofspeakersitdoeshaveinmind.Forfindingananswertothesequestions,however,areappraisalofwhattheobjectoflanguagepolicyactuallyis,i.e.,areappraisalofwhatlanguageactuallyetobeinthesociolinguisticconditionsofglobalization(seePennycook2017:125),isdeemednecessary.Againstthisbackground,ourcontributiondealswithnewspeakersofnewandoldlanguagesintheNetherlands.Indoingso,italsodealswiththemeansthroughwhichthesenewandoldlanguagesarelearnedintheclassroom. 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 537 Afterabriefintroductiononlanguagepolicyanditsparadigms,weventureinexploringsomeofthetermswithinthegamutofcontemporarysociolinguistics’terminology.Fromthere,wepleadforreplacingtheconceptof‘language’asthetraditionalobjectoflanguagepolicieswiththeconceptof‘languageregister’thatweseeasmorefitfordescribingcontemporarylanguagepracticesintimesofglobalizationanddevelopingrelevantlanguagepolicies.Inordertosubstantiateourconceptualclaims,wepresentdatafromtwoethnographiccasestudiesthatdealwithnewspeakers,languageclassroomsandlanguagepolicing.Thefirstcasedealswiththeexperiencesofasylumseekersbeingengagedwithtechno-literacy.Thatis,withtheexperiencesofasylumseekersbeingengagedwithanICTsupportedclassforthedevelopmentoftheircivicintegrationthankstothelearningofDutch(newspeakersofanewlanguagethroughnewmeansoflanguagelearning).ThesecondcasedealswithChinesestudentswhoarefullyproficientinDutch,attendingChineselanguageheritageclassesandlearningMandarinthroughthemeansofabook,i.e.,newspeakersofanoldlanguagelearningthrougholdmeansoflanguagelearning(Li2016).Inourapproach,weconsidertheobservededucationallanguagepracticesandmeta-pragmaticjudgementsoftheindividuallanguageusersinvolvedandweseethemasinitiatorsofbottom-upsociolinguisticchangethatwhileofferinggrassrootssolutionsforlocalchallenges,alsoplaysaroleaslocalevidenceforinforming-downlanguagepolicydevelopment. Languagepolicyforstabilityandhomogeneity Inthefieldoflanguagepolicydevelopmenttherecanbedistinguishedtwomainconsecutivehistoricalphases,thesebeing(1)languagepolicyconnectedtodecolonizationprocessesafterWorldWarIIand(2)languagepolicyconnectedtoimmigrationmovementsstartingintheearly1970s. Thefirstphaseoflanguagepolicymaking,isconnectedtoworldwidedecolonizationrelatedissuesinnewlyemergingnationstates.Heretheapproachtolanguagehadadualperspective.First,toestablishanationallanguageasabindingelementofthenewnationstatefollowingtheHerderianconstellationofonelanguage,onenation,onestate,oneterritory(Gal2006:378)andsecondlytogivearoleandaplacetoallofthe(other)indigenouslanguagespresentinthenewlybornnationstate.Fromthisstandpoint,languagepolicyandplanningtrytocaterforlanguagerelatedquestionsfromastronglyFishmanianunderstandingofthesociologyofagivenlanguageasafiniteentitythatstandstosymbolizenationalidentityandethnolinguisticidentification(seee.g.Fishman1989).Throughthisapproachlanguagepolicyandplanningetoolsforfosteringsociolinguisticstability,findingitspivotalpointinthehomogeneityofanationanditslanguage.Connectedtotheestablishmentofnationallanguages,atthesametimewealsoseelanguagepolicyandplanningasinstrumentsinanecologicallyorotherwisemotivatedendeavorforthepreservation,maintenanceand(even)revitalizationofminoritylanguagesinanefforttopreventlanguagelossandlanguagedeath(Ricento2016).Althoughatfirstsight,languagepolicymakingforsafeguardingminoritylanguagesmightappeartobetheoppositeoreveninconflictwithestablishinganationallanguage,such 13 538
M.Spottietal. endeavorsbasicallyoriginatefromthesameprinciple:theambitiontodefinealsoforminoritylanguagesanensembleoflanguagestatus,corpusandacquisitioninafixedtimeandspace,fulfillingagainthepurposeofconstructingsocietalstability.Theuseofthetermplanninginsuchcontextssubsumesanothersetofthoughtsaroundlanguagesandnationstates,i.e.,theperspectiveoflanguagediversity(i.e.peopleusingavarietyofmajorityandminoritylanguages)asaproblemandplanning(i.e.definingfixedforms,functionsandspacesofusefortheselanguages)asasolution.Thisapproach,irrespectiveofthesocietalchangesthathavetakenplacethankstoglobalization,seemstobestillinplaceacrossmanynationstatesaswellasacrossmanyoftheirinstitutionalenvironments,e.g.education,thatnecessitatelanguageplanning. ThesecondphaseinlanguagepolicymakinghasemergedinresponsetomigrationtoEurope,broughtaboutbyinternationaldecolonizationwaves,anintra-Europeandemandforcheapmanuallaborandbyunpredictable,yetongoing,movementsofasylumseekersbroughtbyconflicts,poverty,climatejeopardyandpoliticalfearofprosecution.Inthissecondphase,languagepolicyhastriedtopresentlanguageasafundamentalhumanrightandbilingualism,lateronaddressedasmultilingualism,asafactoflife,assomethingtobenurturedandpreserved(seeSpottiandBlommaert2017).Thiswaveoflanguagepolicingstartedwiththe1977CouncilofEuropeDirectiveontheEducationoftheChildrenofMigrantWorkersandmadelegalroomforsecondlanguageteachingaswellasimmigrantminoritylanguageteachingintheCommunity’smemberstates(seeReidandReich1992).Irrespectiveofthefactthateducationisastronglyregimentedinstitutionlanguagewise,whatteachersandstudentsdowithlanguageandhowtheyuselanguageineducation,maybewellfarawayfromthenormativeprinciplesspelledoutbylanguageplanning.Althoughlanguagepolicyinhandbooksis(still)mostlydealtwithintermsofCooper’s(1989)distinctionofstatus,corpusandacquisitionplanning,whichinformedmuchoftheworkdoneinthetwophasesoflanguagepolicymakingreportedsofar,ethnographicresearchintolanguagepolicyhas,inthemeantime,madeabundantlyclearthatthereisnosuchthingasastraightforwardandunproblematicimplementation-downlanguagepolicies(cf.McCarty2011).EvenifCooper’sworkhasbynowbeenengagedinamuchmoresophisticatedandcriticalfashion(seeGogonasandMichail2014;Hornberger2006;Pennycook2017)itremainsthatstatus,corpusandacquisitionstillmainlyfocusonaratherfixedunderstandingofwhatlanguageis.Anunderstandingthatnolongerfitsthesociolinguisticpracticesofcontemporarylanguageusersengagingintrans-andpluri-linguallanguaging(Arnautetal.2016,2017;Blommaert2010;BlommaertandRampton2016;Garcíaetal.2017a,b). Languagepolicyandglobalizationledmobility Inadditiontotheaboveconsiderationsregardingthelinkageoflanguagepolicieswithaspecificicityofinstitutions’andpeople’sownlanguageneeds(Blommaert2017)thatispotentiallyhamperingtheeffectivenessofsuchpoliciesinthelongrun,thereisalsoanotherpotentiallydisturbingaspect,i.e.,the 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 539 top-down-bottom-updivideinlanguagepolicymaking.Ifweponderforamomenttheexampleofateacherworkinginamultilingualclassroom,abottom-upperspectivewouldentailthisteacheranalyzingtheproblemsheisfacing,ingupwithalocalsolutionandthenimplementingitinherclassroom.Theday-to-daylanguageteachingpracticesthatresultfromthisprocessarebasicallyareflectionoflocalbottom-uplanguagepolicies.Johnson(2013)characterizessuchbottom-uppoliciesasmicro-level,covert,implicitanddefactopolicies-downpoliciesareinsteadmacro-level,overt,explicitanddejurepolicies.Bottom-updownpoliciesmoreoftenthannot,doappeartobeverydifferentfromoneanother,althoughtryingtofindasolutiontothesameproblem.Thismainlyrelatestoadifferenceinperspective.Thepractitionerineverydaypracticeisfacedwithparticipantsandtheirproblemsthatcannotwaitforpolicymakersfirstgoingthroughallthedifferentstagesofthepolicycyclebeforereachingapossiblesolution(Howlettetal.2009).Thepolicymaker,ontheotherhand,isinapositionthataimseupwithanapprovedpolicyplan.AsSpolsky(2004)noted,languagepolicycanindeedtaketheshapeofatextwithrulesandregulations,ithoweverhastobetakenupinpeople’slanguagepracticesandattitudesaswell.People’slanguagepractices,inasmuchastheirattitudesandtheirmeta-pragmaticjudgements,donotnecessarilycoincidewithwhathasbeendecideduponinlanguagepolicydocumentsdealingwiththesameissue.Theideasandpracticesofthoseinvolvedinsolvinglanguagerelatedproblemsonthegroundarebasicallyareflectionofbottom-up,grassrootspoliciesthatprovidelocalsolutionsforlocalchallenges,butatthesametimecanplayaroleaslocalbottom-upevidenceforacertainapproachinthetraditionalprocess-downpolicydevelopment. Where‘language’isdefinedasaverb,i.e.,‘tolanguage’,ratherthananoun,theconceptofaestoloseitsvalueandlanguageusersareinsteadunderstoodasbeingpartmunitiesofpracticeandknowledgethatshareanduselanguagerepertoiresandregistersconsistingofacontinuouslychangingensembleoflinguisticfeatures,stemmingfromtheirownandothers’linguisticresources,thatarethenmappedontothesociolinguisticfunctionsonehastofulfilwhenengagedinmunicativeexchange.Languagepolicymakingstillseemstolagbehind,engaged,asitis,indefiningthefunction,formandteachingofspecific,well-definedlanguagesinaspecifictimeandplace.Asaconsequence,languagepolicymakinglosestheconnectiontonewspeakers’everydaysociolinguisticpracticesandrealities.Asaremedytothisproblem,weproposetobypasstheaprioriassignmentofspecificsociolinguisticstatusestospecificmunicativeresources.Suchstatuses—e.g.theassumptionthatcertainresourcesare“English”,“standardEnglish”or“standardAmericanEnglish”(seePennycook2017)andtheassumptionthattheidentitiesofthosewhousethesevarietiesfallwithincertaincategories—shouldonthecontraryetheobjectofethnographicinterpretiveinquiry.Thiscallsintoquestionthepresupposedstabilityof“-lingualism”,asin“bi-”or“multi-”,andgivesprioritytolanguagebeingunderstoodasasetofsociolinguisticallyperformedempiricallyobservableformsmappedontofunctionsinwhichnewspeakersenotonlyconfrontedwith“languages”and“codes”,“-lects”and“registers”butalsowiththeideologicalby-productandthemeansthroughwhichsomeonelearns‘language’(seeSpottiandBlommaert2017).We 13 540
M.Spottietal. illustratetheabovebydiscussingtwocasestudiesin-downperspectivesonlanguagepolicymakingturnouttobe‘outdated’.Wepleadforanapproachthatfocusesonlanguagepracticesonthegroundwheretheunderstandingoflanguageisre-evaluatedandnewperspectivesforlanguagepolicymakingarebeingshaped(Jaspaert2015). Newspeakersofanewlanguagethroughnewmeansforlanguagelearning InboththepublicandpoliticaldiscoursesonintegrationofnewlyarrivedmigrantsintheNetherlands,wefindalanguagepolicyeffortthatdoesimplyintegrationthrough(inviting)newspeakerstolearnthe(official)languageofthehostcountry.WhiletheDutchdiscourseregardingintegrationusedtobeabiningDutchasaSecondLanguageaswellasethnolinguisticandethno-culturalidentitypreservationinlanguageclassesforstudentswithanimmigrantminoritybackground(Bezemer2003;Spotti2007),theNetherlandshasmeanwhilewitnessedadiscursiveshifttowardthelearningofDutchasthemainwayforintegrationintomainstreamDutchsociety.ofthis,recentlanguagepolicyeffortsbothataEuropeanandnationallevel(EUCommission2006)aswellastheformulationofpetencesforallEuropeancitizens(Ferrari2013),havebroughtintheuseofICTasthemeansthroughwhichfasterlinguisticandsocio-culturalintegrationcanbeachieved.Althoughregulatedbyaministerialdecreein2007askingtomakeintegrationtrajectoriesshorter,thepresentfieldofICTandintegrationthroughDutchasasecondlanguageesacrossasa‘FarWest’scenariowhereprivateandpublicproviderstaketheleadonthebasisoftheirlowcostsinhosting(online)Dutchasasecondlanguageclassesfornewlyarrivedmigrants(seealsoSpotti2011foracritiqueontheemergenceofthissector).Inwhatfollows,weexamineacaseofICTsupportedlearningofDutchasasecondlanguage.Indoingso,wedealwithaduallearningICTsupportedmethod(ITpreneurs2007)called‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’(DeVirtueleWijk)andwepresent,throughthemeansoffocusedgroupdiscussions,migrantlearners’ownperceptionoflanguagelearningandtheirreactiontothelanguagepolicyimplementationpelsintegrationclassestouseICT. ‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’intheclassroom Inthefollowing,were-appraisesomeresultsemergingfromanethnographicinterpretiveenquiryintomigrantstudents’drivesandbarrierstowardICT.Thisresearchwasconductedataregionaleducationalcenter,herecalledVondenland,backin2010(seeDriessenetal.2011).TheDutchlanguagecoursesprovidedatthecenterthatused‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’weresplitintwostreams:DutchLanguage(NederlandseTaal)andCivicIntegration(Inburgering)(cf.Vondenland2010).Thecivicintegrationcourseisaimedatnewlyarrivedmigrantswhoareengagedinanintegrationtrajectory.Coursesinpreparationtotheintegrationexam,including 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 541 languageproductionandprehensionhaveaponent,throughwhichthelearner‘learnstheDutchlanguagewiththehelpofexercisesandfilmsonputer’(cf.Vondenland2010:3).ICTsupportedsecondlanguagelearningcanbecarriedoutinclass,intheopenesslearningcenterorathome.Ifastudentwishestopursueapaidjobshewillbeassignedtothestream‘IntegrationandWork’.Ifastudentinsteadwishestobeengagedinchildrearingandhousekeepingtasks,sheisassignedtothestream‘IntegrationandPedagogicalSupport’.AsstatedbytheVondenlandcenter’sownpolicy: inordertobeintegratedstudentsmustlearntheDutchlanguageandbuildknowledgeofDutchsociety.Integratingmeansbeingabletofunctioninpracticalsituations,as–forinstance–atalkwithyourGP,withateacherorwithyouremployer.(Vondenland2010:2;ourtranslationfromDutch) Newspeakers’perspectivesontheirnewlanguagelearntthroughnewmeansforlanguagelearning Theclassunderstudyattheeducationalcentrehas17studentspreparingfortheintegrationexam.AllofthemfollowtheIntegrationandPedagogicalSupportstream.Theyareallwomenagedbetween21and56whohaveeitheralowormiddleeducationalbackground,exceptfortwoofthemwhohavefollowedhighersecondaryeducation.ThefirstgrouptobeinterviewedincludedMuhlisefromTurkey,TamusafromRussiaandArzoofromAfghanistan.MuhlisehasbeenintheNetherlandsforthepast9years,shemarriedaTurkishmanwhoalreadylivedandworkedintheNetherlands.Tamusa,instead,cametotheNetherlandsin1999becauseofherhusband’sjob.InRussiashewasalibrarianinalocalprimaryschool.ArzooarrivedasarefugeefromAfghanistanin2002andherintegrationtrajectory,followingtheregulationsspelledoutintheNetherlandsforintegratingnewlyarrivedmigrantshadtopletedinNovember2010.Noneofthemwereworking,thoughthelocalmunicipalityrequiredthemtocarryoutvoluntaryworkbecauseinsuchawaytheycouldpracticetheirDutch.Muhlise’sexperiencewithICTsislimitedtotheclassroomenvironment.Athome,infact,shehadnoPC;ArzooandTamusadidhaveaPCathomethattheyuseforkeepingintouchwiththeirhomecountriesbutalsoforlearningDutch.BothMulhiseandTamusaagreethatICTsmakeitdifficulttolearnDutchbecauseofthefeedbackthatonegets: Tamusa: Withverbs,difficultwithverbs,sometimesIdon’tunderstandwhattodowithverbs,whatdoIdowrong.It’samatterofunderstandingwhyIdosomethingwrong.Whatgoeswrong?
Whydoesitgowrong?
Givemegrammar Arzoo: Yeah,yeahsir,Idon’tunderstand,yougetwrong,wrong,wrong,goodbutthenwhywrong?
ItisnotthefirstlanguageIlearnbuthereIdon’tunderstand (Vondenlandfieldnotes2010:97;ourtranslationfromDutch) 13 542
M.Spottietal. While‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’helpstheminencounteringnewsituationsthatreflectreallifesettings,theyarealsoconfrontedwithspecificbitsoftheDutchlanguage,suchasthejargonofpaniesthatwasoftenmentionedinthefocusedgroupdiscussion. Whenconfrontedwithsuchvocabularies,thesestudentscouldnotfindtheirwayintheICTprogramfromwhichtheygetonlystraightforwardmechanicalfeedbackofrightorwrong.ThesecondfocusedgroupdiscussioninvolvedAmarandSera,bothrefugeesfromIraqwhocametotheNetherlands11and13yearsagorespectivelyandRana,whoisoriginallyfromAfghanistanandwhoetotheNetherlands12yearsago.Allofthemareloweducated.Serareportedtolookforwardtoherexamandthatsheiscurrentlyengagedinvoluntaryworkbecauseshewantstobeintouch‘withtheDutch’.Theyallhaveputerandaathome,whichtheyuseregularly: Amar: Iuseitforallsortsofthings,alsoforDutchRana: Yeah,yesterday,yesterday,youknow,yesterdayIuseditfortheexercises oftheintegrationprogramme,butIlovetalkingandwith‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’youcannottalkAmar: YeahRana: Andalsotheentcounts,wecannotpracticeentandthenwhenwetalk,weareforeigners,itisamatterofent,theyunderstandalotbutsometimeswhenItalktheylookatyou,likeIdon’tunderstand.’ IntermsoftheICTapplication,theconversationunfoldedasfollows Sera: Isearchforajob,Iamalmostdonewithfindingoneandthishelpsmeforajobforreallife,Iamalmostdone,itisimportantformetoknowwords,formychildren,formychildrenatschool Max: Andhowabouttheexercisethatyouhavedoneyesterdayandtoday,theexerciseofgoingtothelibrary?
Rana: Itwaseasy,easy,everydayyouusethesewordsoutsideAmar: WiththemouseIhavenotlearnedithere,Ihavelearneditbefore,beforeI didnotknowanything,twothreetimesandthenitisokSera: Iknewitalready,youdon’tneedschoolforusingamouse,thoughsome peopleheredidlearnithere(Vondenlandfieldnotes2010:97;ourtranslationfromDutch) Ontheonehand,RanaisnotsatisfiedbecauseofthelackofspeakingskillsinvolvedinthisICTapplication.Otherlearners,althoughtheyseethebenefitsofbeingexposedtoreallifesituations,alsocalluponalackofanypossibilitytopracticetheirent,ponentoftheirDutchlanguageskillsthatstillmakesthemsoundforeign.Last,theICTapplicationconfrontsthelearnerswithgenresandvocabularythatcanbeanobstacle.Thislackofexperiencewithacertainregister,though,ismoreadevelopmentstagethatlearnersmayencounterwiththeirDutchlanguagethanalimitationoftheICTapplication.NativeDutchspeakerstooarenotacquaintedwitheveryregister 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 543 ofDutch,asthereisnonativespeakerwhoknowshis/herlanguageasawholeandwhoknowshis/herlanguageperfectlywell.Thislackofregisterproficiencyesevenmoreproblematicwhenthereisalackofbackgroundvocabularyknowledge,asthelearnerdoesnotunderstandthedialogueassignedtoher.Anotherobstaclelearnersreportinworkingwith‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’isthattherearenowronganswers. Last,wehaveFiliz,andAkanan.FilizisofanoriginandaspeakerofanArabicaswellasofGermanasshehaslivedinGermanysinceshewas9yearsold.AkananisfromTurkey.ShehasleftthecountrytomarryaTurkishmanwhohaslivedintheNetherlandsfor23years.FilizreportstounderstandprettymucheverythingthatpeoplesaytoherinDutchthroughherknowledgeofGerman,butherspeakingandwritingskillsare,inherview,bothstillratherpoor.Furthermore,Filiz,attimes,doesnotknowwhycertainthingshappeninDutchandthatiswhentheuseofICT,suchasonlinedictionariesandgrammarbuddiesfromDutchtoGerman,einhandy.Whenaddressing‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’,FilizreportsthatthelevelofunderstandingthatisrequiredfromthisICTapplicationisfairlylow.However: Filiz: Thiswaseasy,easy,thelibraryiseasy,theschooliseasy,Iknowitbutthegrammarisverydifficult Akanan: Yeswiththechildren.Researcher:Andhowaboutgrammar?
Filiz: IunderstandeverythingandthenthenextdayIetaboutthefeedback puterhasgivenmeAkanan: Yes,yesformetoo.Grammar,difficult,Iamnotusedtowork- puter,mychildrendoit,Ilookforletters,whatdoIdo,whatshouldIdo,theyhavetohelpme.Grammarisbooksputer(Vondenlandfieldnotes2010:101;ourtranslationfromDutch) Summaryofcase1 Thedatacollectedduringthesefocusedgroupdiscussionsreportaparadoxinthat‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’,anapplicationthatmatches-downpolicyaimingatthedevelopmentoflanguageskillsinreal-lifesituations,infact,presentsnewspeakerswithadoublesetofobstacles.First,itturnedoutthatitwasnotalwayscleartothenewspeakerswhattheyshoulddowithlanguageintheICTbased‘reallife’situations,aregisterboundlanguagelearning,andwhetherwhattheydowithagivenregisterisright.Further,anobstacletoobtainoptimalresultsfromthisICTapplicationcouldbefoundinthelackoftechno-literacythatthesenewspeakersexperiencewhendealingwithICT-leadlanguagelearningandmorespecificallywithgrammar,somethingthattheyareusedtolearnfrombooks.Thesestudentsinplainedhavingtorespondtothepromptsgivenbytheapplication.Theyfeltthatforlearningaforeignlanguage,oneneedsbooks,rulesandagooddoseofgrammarwhiletheymissedoutonthedevelopmentmunicationskillsandintrainingtheirpronunciationwiththeirteacher.Theresulttheyreportedwasthattheyendedupmemorizingtherightanswerswithoutknowingwhetherand/orwhytheseanswerswereeitherwellorill-fittingmunicativeexchangeathand. 13 544
M.Spottietal. Newspeakersofanoldlanguage:observationsfromChinese heritagelanguageclassroomsintheNetherlands TheChinesebelongtotheoldestestablishedmunitiesintheNetherlands.July2011witnessedthe100yearsanniversaryofChinesepresenceintheNetherlands,whichwascelebratedwithaLionDancefeaturingacrewof100ChineselionsperformingattheDamSquareinAmsterdam(Li2016:19).FiguresofthenumberofChineselivingintheNetherlandsrangefrom84,310in2015(ordingtotheCentralBureauofStatistics’definitionintermsofpersons’ortheirparents’nationalityandcountryofbirth)and150,000(ordingtothemoreinclusiveestimatebytheChineseembassyintheNetherlands).Inthepre-1990sthemajorityofChineseimmigrantscamefromHongKong,ZheijangandGuandongandwerespeakersofCantonese.After2000,howeverthenumberofingfromZheijangandotherprovincesinmainlandChinahasincreasedtoover50%,mostofthembeingspeakersofPutonghua(pp.21–22). ThemunityinEindhovenprovidesanexcellentreflectionoftheabovesketcheddemographicdevelopmentanditsconsequencesforpeople’slanguageandidentityrepertoires.ThiscanbeperfectlyobservedintheChineseschoolinEindhoven,whichwasestablishedin1978bythemunitytoprovideCantoneselessonstochildrenofCantoneseorigin.Theschoolisplementaryorheritageschoolthatmunity-runandself-financed.In2012ithadover300childrenfromKindergartentograde12whoonSaturdaysfrom9.15to11.45mainlyfollowlessonsinMandarin(pp.25–26). Inwhatfollowswewilldiscusstwokeyincidents(KroonandSturm2007)thatillustratethepositionofDutch-ChinesenewspeakersinthepolycentricChineseclassroominEindhovenrunbyaChineseteacherwhomwecallhereMrsSun. Chineseclassrooms ThefirstepisodeinMrs.Sun’sclassthatwedealwithhereisateacher-leddiscussionofacurriculumtextwitheight(universityandhighersecondaryeducation)students,aged17–20.Mrs.Sun’sclassisveryheterogeneous:threestudentsareofHongKongCantonesebackground;twoareofWenzhounesebackgroundandoneeachisofFuzhouneseandMandarinbackground.TheclassroomlanguageisexclusivelyMandarinorPutonghua.Allstudentshavenative-likeproficiencyinDutch. Thetextthatwasdiscussed,‘Thesongofalittlebrook’,isawell-knownChinesefolkstory,writtenin1959duringChina’sBigLeapForwardcampaign,strivingtotransformChinaintoamunistsocietytroughindustrializationandcollectivization.Thestoryaimsatproducingandinstillingtraditionalvalues,collectivitymunityinthestudents.Thelittlebrook,runningthroughthelandscapetothesea,turningintoastreamandultimatelyabigriverisametaphorforthesocialistrevolutionandconstructionofChina,praisinghardworkandcollectiveachievement.AndthatexactlyiswhatMrs.Sunwantsherclasstogetoutofthetext.Heropeningquestionhowtheyfeelaboutthetext,howeverdoesnotleadtomuchinterest.‘Idon’thaveanyfeelingsaboutthistext’(我没有什么没感 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 545 受),MandarinbackgroundstudentTaosays,and‘Nothing’(没意思)WhenzouneseHongsays.Aftertheteacher’sexplanationofthemetaphoricalmeaningofthestory,thestudentsstartgivingtheirowninterpretationsofthetext.Taoforexample,reactstoMrs.Sun’sstatementthat‘theNetherlandsabsolutelymakespeoplelazy,makespeoplemakingnoefforts’(我觉得荷兰太让人不努力了)bystating‘DutchpeoplearemoreefficientthanChinese’(荷兰人比中国人efficiënt.中国人是没办法)culminatinginhisclaimthat‘mywayofthinkingisDutch’(我的想法是荷兰人的想法).InthatculturalframeworkthereisclearlynoroomforthemessageofatraditionalChinesefolkstory.AsLi(2016:56)concludes:“Whiletheteacherseemedtobelievethatteaching‘language’and‘culture’throughfolkstorieswasameansofreproducing‘Chinese’identityintheyoungpeople’sminds,theimpositionofsuchChinesenesswasexplicitlychallengedandrenegotiatedintheclassroom.ThestudentsassertivelyconsideredthemselvesDutchcitizensfullyparticipatingandentrenchedinDutchcultureandsociety,andrejectedthedeepermetaphoricalmeaningandmorallessonembeddedinthestory.” AnotherexampleofpetingperspectivesbetweenaChineseteacherandDutch-Chineseyoungstersisnicelyillustratedinateacher-studentclassroominteractionontoneinChineseinMr.Zhou’sclassattendedbyfourstudents(age16–19),twoofHongKongCantonese,oneofWenzhouneseandoneofmixedGuandongandHongKongbackground.Mr.Zhou,anearliermigrantfromGuandongprovincewhoisaspeakerofCantoneseaskswhocanmakeasentenceorgivethemeaninginDutchof本质(bĕnzhí,‘property’,pronouncedwithrisingtone).GuandongHonkongeseTongtonggivesthecorrectanswerbutalsoaskstheteacher:不是本质吗(‘Shouldn’titbebĕnzhì’,withfallingtone).Theteacherlooksatthebookagainandagrees:本质啊,应该读第四声啊,对不起(‘Bĕnzhì,ah,shouldbepronouncedwiththefourthtoneah,sorry’).Thesamestoryisrepeatedwiththewrongpronunciationof比较(bǐjiăoinsteadofbǐjiào)againcorrectedbyTongTongandotherstudentsandagreeduponbytheteacher.Li(2016:42)concludes:“ThisclassroomepisodepresentsaseriousdeviationfromthetraditionalChineselanguageclasswheretheteacherhasallthe‘knowledge’(…)Thelanguageteacher’spronunciationis‘corrected’byhisstudents.” ThisdocumentsthechangeintheChineseschoolfromonelanguageregime(Cantonese)toanother(Mandarin/Putonghua)andDutchChinesestudentsastheagentsofthischange,reflectinginthediasporaageopoliticalrepositioningofthePeoplesRepublicasaneweconomicworldpower. Inconclusion,thesetwoexamplescenteredaroundbeingaDutch-ChinesestudentindealingwithChinesemakeclearthattheclassroomisapolycentricenvironmentinwhichtheChineseschoolprovidesthelanguage(Mandarin/Putonghua)andthevaluesfromthePRC.Thestudentshoweveronlytakethelanguage(asmodity)andatthesametimechallengetheteacher’sauthorityregardingChineselanguageandvalues.Assuchtheschoolesasiteofconflict,contestationandnegotiationoverChinesenessfromaDutchperspectivebystudentswhoarepetentinDutchandwhoareatthesamepetentDutchnewspeakersofChinese. 13 546
M.Spottietal. Chineseonline InadditiontotheaboveofflineclassroomexampleswewillnowdealwithChineseyouth’smetalinguisticinteractiononline,morespecificallyfocusingontheDutchmediumteenageAsianandmunityontheDutchworksiteHyves(munitywasestablishedin2007byaCantonese-speakingChinese-DutchgirlwhostudiedChinese(Mandarin)plementaryeducationinAmsterdam.Itwascloseddownin2013afterFacebookhadtakenoverHyves.HerewewillhavealookatoneofthediscussionforumsontheAsianandProudHyve,asitwasintroducedApril20,2008at21:37byLeonandasked:WelkChineesdialectsprekenjullie?
(WhatChinesedialectdoyouspeak).Leonintroduceshimselfasfollows(originallyinDutch): I’mcantonesemyself☺imgoingtochineseschoolineindhoven,Ihavetolearn[Chinese]frommyparents-.-,, ButyeahIfindMandarinhardxD!
canunderstanditalittle,butcan’tspeakit>.”icranfor48hand46minandhad11postsby9contributors.Asfarastravelisconcerneditturnsoutthatmostcontributorstravelled(orwanttotravel)toChinafortouristicreasons(notunliketheirDutchpeers).ThelanguagesmentionedincludeMandarin,Wenzhounese,Cantonese,WeitouhuaandHakkaandthecontributorsindicatethattheirproficiencyinoneoftheseChinesesisnotperfectorwhattheywouldlikeittobe.“Fortheyoungadultsonjonc.nlandtheteenagersontheAsianandmunity,”Li(2016:114)concludes,“beingChineseinvariablymeansknowingDutchandsometimesmeansknowingverylittleChineseornoChineseatall(…).”
Summaryofcase2
AmainconclusionoftheEindhovenChineseschoolcasestudyisthattheseChineseyoungsters,althoughfromtheperspectiveofnewspeakerismtheywouldbeconsiderednewspeakersofDutch,areinfact(new)nearnativespeakersofDutchthatembraceDutchidentityandvalues.Atthesametime,although(avarietyof)Chineseistheirheritagelanguage,theyarenewspeakersofChinese,i.e.PutonghuabutwithoutfollowingtraditionalChinesevalues.Theyareinfactnotreallyspeakersoftheirheritagelanguage(s),butareingmoreandmoreinternationallyorientedasisshownbythemoptingforDutchandevenmainlyEnglishononlineforums.ItcanthereforebeconcludedthatthelanguagesandidentitiesdisplayedbyChineseyoungstersintheNetherlandsarenotcategoricalbutsituated,i.e.performedandnegotiatedfrommomenttomoment,fromspacetospace:intheChineseclassroomseekingvoiceinoppositionwiththeteachersandonlineseekingvoiceiningtogetherandsharingexperienceswithotherinternationalAsians.Assuchtheyconstituteplextypeofnewspeaker,biningbeinga(new)nearnativespeakerofDutch,anewspeakerofChinese(Mandarin/Putonghua)andanewspeakerofEnglish.Thelevelsofproficiencyintheselanguagesmayvary:assecondorthirdgenerationimmigrantstheirDutchproficiencymightbe(near)native,theirproficiencyinMandarin/Putonghuamightnotbeperfectastheythemselvesstipulate—butit’snotablybetterthanthatoftheirCantonesebackgroundteachers—andtheirEnglishproficiencycertainlymeetsinternationalonlineyouthstandards.Whattheyhowevermissis“old”,i.e.Chineseheritagelanguageproficiency,whichisingobsoletenotonlyintheNetherlandsandintheinternationalmunitytheyengagewithbutalsoincontemporarymainlandChinawheretheywouldwishtogoforaholidayorfamilyvisit.
Fromalanguagepolicyperspectiveweseethatthestudents’bottom-uplanguagepracticesandmetalinguisticperspectivesintheChineseschoolandonthechallenge-downfamilylanguagepoliciesoftheirparentswhoafterall
13
548
M.Spottietal. wantedthemtolearn“Chinese”aswellastheChineseschool’sfocusbininglearningChinesewithlearningChinesevalues.ThesespeakersofDutchandChineseintheNetherlandsseekandmanagetoacquiretheirownvoiceofflineaswellasonline.Indoingsotheyrepresentglobalyouthinasuperdiversesocietythateclecticallyoptsforthelanguageandidentityresourceseinhandyforachievingmunicativegoalsirrespectiveofthepoliciessetforthem. Thenewspeakerandthelanguagepolicyabyss Thetwocaseswehavereportedhereshowthatethnographyhasthepotentialofopeninguptheprocessoflanguagepolicymakingwhiletyingitdowntothoseactorsthatareinitiatorsofsociolinguisticchange.Moreconcretelyput,asalreadypointedoutbyHornbergerandMcCarty(2012),ethnographyshowsthatlargepolicystructuresandglobalizingforcesarereconfiguredinlocallanguageideologiesandpracticesor—astheytheorize—in“globalizationfromthebottomup”.Whattheseexamplesshowisthatthelanguageusersathanddonotseemtodothingswithlanguagefollowingtheexactwaysthatofficiallanguagepolicieswouldwantorexpectthemto.Itisexactlytherethatastartingpointcanbefoundfortransforminglanguagepolicymakingfrom-downtoabottom-upendeavor.AllovertheworldlanguageacademiesliketheNederlandseTaalunieintheNetherlands,FlandersandSuriname,theademiadellaCruscainItalyandtheAcadémieFrançaiseinFrance—allmembersoftheEuropeanFederationofNationalInstitutionsforLanguage(EFNIL)—dealwithrulesandregulationsaboutwhatisallowedandwhatisnotallowedinusing,mainlywriting,aspecificlanguage.Atthesametime,however,languageusersengagewithlanguageinpolylingualways(Jørgensenetal.2016),therebyusing,biningandbiningthelinguisticresourcesthattheyhaveavailablefromtheirsociolinguisticrepertoiressotoreachtheendgoalofhavingtheirvoiceheardwhenengagedinaninteraction.Theserepertoiresareinturnused–inmanycasesessfully—tomakemeaningmunitiesofpracticeandknowledgethatarenolongerstucktotheconceptofamunitywithafixedandprescribedlinguisticformandformat.Such‘poly-languagingpractices’arefarawayfromtheexclusiveandnormativeperspectivethattraditionallyseemstobeembracedbylanguagepolicies,aswellasbylanguagepolicyagentsandpoliticaldiscoursesregulatinglanguageacquisition,forexampleinintegrationcontexts.Assuchtheycanbeconsideredlocal,bottom-uplanguagepoliciesthatcanprovideempiricallygroundedinspirationforinstitutionallanguagepolicydevelopment. Thetwocaseswehavedealtwithinthiscontributionleadustothefollowingconclusions.Thealwaysexistingdistance-downpoliciesandbottomuppracticesinthefieldoflanguageseemstohavedevelopedintoanabysswhere‘newspeakers’ofbothnewandoldlanguageslearninglanguagethroughnewandoldmeansforlanguagelearningareinjeopardyofsinkinginto.Theactuallanguagepracticesandtheunderlyingattitudesthatcanbeobservedintimesofglobalizationledmobilityarenolongeravalidreflectionofinstitutionallysupportedlanguagepolicies,understoodas“anattemptbysomeonetomodifythelinguisticbehaviourofmunityforsomereason”asKaplanandBaldauf(1997:3) 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 549 wrotesomewhatmorethan20yearsago.Timeandpression,togetherwith-down-bottom-updivideaswellastheirpotentiallynegativeconsequencesfortheefficiencyandeffectivenessofconcretepoliciesmayapplytoallpolicymakingirrespectiveofthepolicyobjectunderconsideration,whetherthisislanguageorthemeansthroughwhichagivenlanguageshouldbelearntforagivenpurpose.Inthedomainoflanguagepolicy,however,thereisplicatingandpotentiallydamagingfactor,i.e.,theveryconceptof‘language’thatis(still)ingeneralusehereasisreflectedinforexamplemanyolderandnewerhandbooks(cf.Cooper1989;Johnson2013).Inorderforalanguagepolicytobeessfulincateringfortheneedsofnewspeakers,ithastoreorientitselftoadefinitionoflanguagethatincludespeople’slinguisticresources,registersandrepertoiresandtheirusesintheplexthough“ordered”realityoftheactuallanguagepracticesitshouldserve. Thedomainofactuallanguagepractices,inotherwords,canbeconsideredthemeetingplaceofformalpoliciesandnormsfromaboveandinformalpracticesandemergentnormsfrombelow.Forexactlythatreason,followingRicentoandHornberger(1996:419),wepleadforforegroundingtheagencyoflanguageusersindecidingonlanguagepolicies.Furthermore,giventhecutthatweembracehere,wepelledtoreflectonthepowerrelationsandpowerresultsthathaveshapedthepresentwaysofconceptualizinglanguage.Weought,infact,topayattentiontoemergentwaysofconceptualizinglanguagethatpeopleuseonthegroundand,indoingso,wehopetohaveshowedthatthoseemergentmoreinclusivewaysinwhichlanguagetendstobeused,bearinmindthepurposeof‘doingtogetherness’andconvivialityratherthanforevokinganddefendingevenfurthertheconstructionofdifferenceandinequality.Insodoingtheconceptofnewspeakermanages,infact,toavoidfallingintotheincrementalitythatcharacterizes,asMakoni(2012)denounces,the‘barrenverbiage’surroundingthecontemporarysociolinguisticdebateaboutlanguageandsociety. Acknowledgements ThisworkwassupportedbytheEuropeanCooperationinScienceandTechnologyaspartofEUCOSTActionIS1306entitled‘NewSpeakersinaMultilingualEurope:OpportunitiesandChallenges’. Openess ThisarticleisdistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0InternationalLicense(/licenses/by/4.0/),whichpermitsunrestricteduse,distribution,andreproductioninanymedium,providedyougiveappropriatecredittotheoriginalauthor(s)andthesource,providealinktotheCreativeCommonslicense,andindicateifchangesweremade. References Arnaut,
K.,Blommaert,
J.,Rampton,
B.,&Spotti,
M.(2016).Languageandsuperdiversity.NewYork:Routledge. Arnaut,
K.,Karrebæk,
M.,Spotti,
M.,&Blommaert,
J.(2017).Engagingsuperdiversity.biningspaces,timesandlanguagepractices.Bristol:MultilingualMatters. Bezemer,
J.(2003).Dealingwithmultilingualismineducation.AcasestudyofaDutchprimaryschoolclassroom.Amsterdam:AksantAcademicPublishers. Blommaert,
J.(2010).Thesociolinguisticsofglobalization.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. 13 550
M.Spottietal. Blommaert,
J.(2017).es,scalesplexityinthestudyoflanguage.InK.Arnaut,
M.Karrebæk,
M.Spotti,&
J.Blommaert(Eds.),Engagingsuperdiversity.biningspaces,timesandlanguagepractices(pp.47–62).Bristol:MultilingualMatters. Blommaert,
J.,Kelly-Holmes,
H.,Lane,
P.,Leppänen,
S.,Moriarty,
M.,Pietikäinen,
S.,etal.(2009).Media,multilingualismandlanguagepolicing:Anintroduction.LanguagePolicy,8
(3),203–207. Blommaert,
J.,&Rampton,
B.(2016).Languageandsuperdiversity.InK.Arnaut,
J.Blommaert,
B.Rampton,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),Languageandsuperdiversity(pp.21–48).NewYork:Routledge. Cooper,
R.L.(1989).Languageplanningandsocialchange.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Driessen,
M.,vanFuhri,
K.,Emmeren,
J.,Nygren-Junkin,
L.,&Spotti,
M.(2011).ICTuseinL2educa- tionforadultmigrants:AqualitativestudyintheNetherlandsandSweden.Seville:JRCEuropeanCommissionInstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies.EUCommission.(2006).Ministerialdeclarationone-inclusion.essed10Sept2011.Ferrari,
A.(2013).AframeworkfordevelopingandunderstandingpetenceinEurope.JRCScientificandPolicyReports.EuropeanUnion:LuxembourgPublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion.Fishman,
J.(1989).Languageandethnicityinaminoritysociolinguisticperspective.Clevedon,Philadelphia:MultilingualMatters.Gal,
S.(2006).Language,itsstakes,anditseffects.InR.E.Goodin&Ch.Tilly(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookofcontextualpoliticalanalysis(pp.376–391).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.García,
O.,Flores,
N.,&Spotti,
M.(Eds.).(2017a).TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.García,
O.,Flores,
N.,&Spotti,
M.(2017b).Introduction-languageandsociety:Acriticalpoststructuralistperspective.InO.García,
N.Flores,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety(pp.1–16).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Gogonas,
N.,&Michail,
D.(2014).Ethnolinguisticvitality,languageuseandsocialintegrationamongstAlbanianimmigrantsinGreece.JournalofMultilingualandMulticulturalDevelopment,36
(2),198–211.Hornberger,
N.(2006).Frameworksandmodelsinlanguagepolicyandplanning.InT.Ricento(Ed.),Anintroductiontolanguagepolicy:Theoryandmethod(pp.24–41).Malden,MA:BlackwellPublishing.Hornberger,
N.,&McCarty,
T.L.(2012).Globalizationfromthebottomup:Indigenouslanguageplanningandpolicyacrosstime,space,andplace.InternationalMultilingualResearchJournal,6
(1),1–
7.Howlett,
M.,Ramesh,
M.,&Perl,
A.(2009).Studyingpublicpolicy.Policycycles&policysubsystems.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.ITpreneurs.(2007).ThuisinNederlands:DeVirtueleWijk./watch?
v=VIHnHFRwizM.essed10Sept2011.Jaspaert,
K.(2015).Creatingquarterfordoingthingswithlanguage.EuropeanJournalofAppliedLinguistics,3
(1),21–45.Johnson,
D.C.(2013).Languagepolicy.NewYork:PalgraveMcMillan.Jørgensen,
J.N.,Karrebæk,
M.,Madsen,
L.,&Møller,
J.S.(2016).Polylanguaginginsuperdiversity.InK.Arnaut,
J.Blommaert,
B.Rampton,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),Languageandsuperdiversity(pp.137–154).NewYork:Routledge.Kaplan,
R.B.,&Baldauf,
R.B.(1997).Languageplanning:Frompracticetotheory.Clevedon:MultilingualMatters.Kroon,
S.,&Sturm,
J.(2007).parativecasestudyresearchineducation:Keyincidentanalysisandinternationaltriangulation.InW.Herrlitz,
S.Ongstad,&
P.-H.vandeVen(Eds.),ResearchonMTEinparativeinternationalperspective—Theoreticalandmethodological issues(pp.99–118).Amsterdam:Rodopi.Kurvers,
J.,&Spotti,
M.(2015).TheshiftinglandscapeofDutchintegrationpolicy:FromL1literacy teachingtoliteracyinDutchasentrancecriteriontotheNetherlands.InJ.Simpson&
A.Whiteside(Eds.),Adultlanguageeducationandmigration:Challengingagendasinpolicyandpractice(pp.173–186).Abingdon:Routledge.Li,
J.(2016).Chinesenessasamovingtarget.ChanginginfrastructuresoftheChinesediapsoraintheNetherlands.Ph.D.thesisTilburgUniversity.Makoni,
S.(2012).Acritiqueoflanguage,languagingandsupervernacular.MultasVozes,1
(2),189–199.McCarty,
T.(Ed.).(2011).EthnographyandlanguagePolicy.London:Routledge. 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 551 O’Rourke,
B.,Pujolar,
J.,&Ramallo,
F.(2014).Newspeakersofminoritylanguages:Thechallengingopportunity.InternationalJournaloftheSociologyofLanguage,231,1–20. O’Rourke,
B.,Pujolar,
J.,&Ramallo,
F.(2015).Specialissue:NewspeakersandprocessesofNewSpeakernessacrosstimeandspace.AppliedLinguisticsReview,6
(2),145–150. O’Rourke,
B.,Pujolar,
J.,&Walsh,
J.(2017).LanguageeducationandNewSpeakersofminoritylanguages.InM.Stephen(Ed.),Encyclopediaoflanguageandeducation(3rded.)(‘LanguagePolicyandPoliticalIssuesinEducation’).NewYork:Springer. O’Rourke,
B.,&Ramallo,
F.(2011).Thenativenon-nativedichotomyinminoritylanguagecontexts:ComparisonsbetweenIrishandGalician.LanguageProblemsandLanguagePlanning,35
(2),139–159. Pennycook,
A.(2017).Languagepolicyandlocalpractices.InO.García,
N.Flores,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety(pp.125–140).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Reid,
E.,&Reich,
H.(Eds.).(1992).Breakingtheboundaries:Migrantworkers’childrenintheEC.Clevedon:MultilingualMatters. Ricento,
T.(2016).Commentary.InE.Barakos&
J.W.Unger(Eds.),Discursiveapproachestolanguagepolicy(pp.275–286).London:PalgraveMacmillan. Ricento,
T.,&Hornberger,
N.(1996).Unpeelingtheonion:LanguageplanningandpolicyandtheELTprofessional.TESOLQuarterly,30
(3),401–427. Spolsky,
B.(2004).Languagepolicy.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Spotti,
M.(2007).Developingidentities;Identityconstructioninmulticulturalprimaryclassroomsinthe NetherlandsandFlanders.Amsterdam:AksantAcademicPublishers.Spotti,
M.(2011).Ideologiesofessforsuperdiversecitizens:TheDutchtestingregimeforintegra- tionandtheonlineprivatesector.Diversities,13
(2),39–55.Spotti,
M.,&Blommaert,
J.(2017).Bilingualism,multilingualism,globalizationandsuperdiversity: Towardssociolinguisticrepertoires.InO.García,
N.Flores,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety(pp.161–178).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Vondenland.(2010).CurriculumvoorInburgering.InternalPublicationVondenland. MassimilianoSpotti isAssistantProfessorattheDepartofCultureStudiesanddeputyDirectorofBabylon,CentreforStudyofSuperdiversityatTilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands.Hismainresearchinterestsaremigrants,theiridentitiesandthesocietalandsociolinguistictrajectoriesanddiscoursesofinclusionandexclusiontheyarepartofduringtheirintegrationprocess. SjaakKroon isProfessorofMultilingualismintheMulticulturalSociety.HeisamemberoftheDepartmentofCultureStudiesandBabylon,CenterfortheStudyofSuperdiversityatTilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands.Hismainfocusinresearchandteachingisonlinguisticandculturaldiversity,languagepolicy,literacyandeducationinthecontextofglobalizationandsuperdiversity. JinlingLi gotherPhDon‘Chineseasamovingtarget’attheDepartmentofCultureStudies,TilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands.HerresearchinterestisinthefieldofChineselanguage,cultureandidentityinonineandofflinecontextsinChinesemunitiesinthecontextofglobalizationandsuperdiversity. 13
5 ORIGINALPAPER Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationintothegapbetweenlanguagepracticesandlanguagepolicy MassimilianoSpotti1 ·SjaakKroon1·JinlingLi1 Received:6November2017/epted:14December2018/Publishedonline:2March2019©TheAuthor(s)2019 AbstractThispaperexplorestheintersectionofnewspeakersinconditionsofglobalisationledmobilityanditinvestigatestheimplicationsthephenomenamayhaveforlanguagepolicymaking.Itfirstdescribestwohistoricalphasesinlanguagepolicydevelopmentthatarecloselyrelatedtoasociolinguisticsofstability.Inthis,itcriticiseshowpresent-daylanguagepolicyisattachedtospecifictimeandspaceconstraintswhosefocusisabynowoutdatedconceptoflanguageandofspeakerasitsprescriptiveobjects—thusleadinginstitutionallanguagepoliciestonotbeing‘insync’withcontemporarynewspeakers’socio-andgeo-politicalmovementsanddevelopments.Thispropositionisillustratedintwocasestudies,bothlocatedintheNetherlandsanddealingwiththelanguagepracticesandconnectedpoliciesoftwotypesofnewspeakers.Thefirstcasedealswiththeexperiencesofasylumseekersbeingengagedwith‘techno-literacies’.ThatisasylumseekersbeingpartofICTassistedclassesforcivicintegrationthroughthelearningofDutch(newspeakersofanewlanguage,learningthroughnewmeansoflanguagelearning).ThesecondcasedealswithChinesestudentswhoarefullyproficientinDutch,attendinglanguageheritageclassesforlearningMandarinthroughbookbasedlessons(newspeakersofanoldlanguage,learningthrougholdmeansoflanguagelearning).Inbothcases,theobservedlanguagepracticesandmeta-pragmaticjudgementsoftheindividuallanguageuserselectthemasinitiatorsofbottom-upsociolinguisticchangethat,whileofferinggrassrootssolutionsforlocalchallenges,alsoplaysaroleaslocalevidenceforinforming-downlanguagepolicydevelopment. Keywords Newspeaker·Mobility·ICT·Ethnography·Languagepolicy·Dutch·Chineseheritagelanguageteaching·Asylumseekers·Civicintegration *MassimilianoSpottim.spotti@tilburguniversity.edu 1DepartmentofCultureStudies,Babylon–CenterfortheStudyofSuperdiversity,TilburgUniversity,5000LETilburg,TheNetherlands 13Vol.:(0123456789) 536 Introduction
M.Spottietal. Urgesh: LookatthisSir,lookatthisWassif: Thesearecoolbruv,thesearecoolUrgesh: IhaveseenthemonagigWassif: Yeahyeah,lookatthat,power,broderMax,purepower (Asylum2.0,fieldnotes14102013) Theabovequoteistakenfromthefieldworklognotesofaprojectaimedatinvestigatingwhatitmeanstobeanasylumseekerinanageofglobalization.ItsmaincharactersareUrgesh,ayoungBengaliasylumseekerengagedinwatchingaYouTubevideo,andWassif,anAfghaniasylumseeker,bothofthematanasylumseekingcenterinFlanders,theDutchspeakingpartofBelgium,theplacewherethesetwoyoungmenwishtostayoncetheirrefugeestatuswillbeapproved.Intheexcerpt,thesemenarementingthevideousingtheirownvarietiesofEnglish—astheBengalibandonthescreen,calledSultanaBibiana,playsacoverfromtheAmericanbandMetallicawhileperformingataconcertinIndonesia.Intheabovequote,severalaretheissuesatplay.First,asexemplifiedbythetotalabsenceofDutchintheexchange,wedonotseeanytraceofStatedrivenlanguagepoliciesbeingtakenonboardbythetwolanguageusers.Second,weseethattheinteractionathandimpliesthattheinterlocutorsareratherproficientlanguageusersofaninternationallanguage,i.e.English.Last,wecanalsoobservethattheyareproficienttechno-literatesinthattheyusetheasameansforessingpopculturecontent(KurversandSpotti2015). Thesituationpicturedaboveconfrontsuswithquestionsthatarefundamentalforthefieldoflanguagepolicy.First,isthereanypurposeorroomleftfordownlanguagepoliciesandlanguagepolicing(Blommaertetal.2009)incontextsthatarecharacterizedbyglobalizationledmobilityanditsplexity?
And,ifso,whatrolecanthesepolicieshaveinthelifeofthosepeople,whodonotnecessarilybelongtothesociolinguisticmainstream,inthattheyholdeitheranindigenousminoritybackgroundoraglobalizedmigratorybackground?
Last,whatdoesthissayaboutthenewlycoinedterm‘newspeaker’(O’Rourkeetal.2014,2015,2017;O’RourkeandRamallo2011)?
Isityetanotherincrementaltermfordescribingsociolinguisticphenomenacausedbyglobalizationledmobilityordoesithaveatransformativepotentialtoitself?
Thesequestions,wefeel,canbeofhelptowardtheformulationofarefreshinganswertowhatistheaimandobjectoflanguagepolicy,i.e.,whatconceptoflanguageitshouldactuallyembrace,whatitshouldwishtoachieve,andwhatkindofspeakersitdoeshaveinmind.Forfindingananswertothesequestions,however,areappraisalofwhattheobjectoflanguagepolicyactuallyis,i.e.,areappraisalofwhatlanguageactuallyetobeinthesociolinguisticconditionsofglobalization(seePennycook2017:125),isdeemednecessary.Againstthisbackground,ourcontributiondealswithnewspeakersofnewandoldlanguagesintheNetherlands.Indoingso,italsodealswiththemeansthroughwhichthesenewandoldlanguagesarelearnedintheclassroom. 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 537 Afterabriefintroductiononlanguagepolicyanditsparadigms,weventureinexploringsomeofthetermswithinthegamutofcontemporarysociolinguistics’terminology.Fromthere,wepleadforreplacingtheconceptof‘language’asthetraditionalobjectoflanguagepolicieswiththeconceptof‘languageregister’thatweseeasmorefitfordescribingcontemporarylanguagepracticesintimesofglobalizationanddevelopingrelevantlanguagepolicies.Inordertosubstantiateourconceptualclaims,wepresentdatafromtwoethnographiccasestudiesthatdealwithnewspeakers,languageclassroomsandlanguagepolicing.Thefirstcasedealswiththeexperiencesofasylumseekersbeingengagedwithtechno-literacy.Thatis,withtheexperiencesofasylumseekersbeingengagedwithanICTsupportedclassforthedevelopmentoftheircivicintegrationthankstothelearningofDutch(newspeakersofanewlanguagethroughnewmeansoflanguagelearning).ThesecondcasedealswithChinesestudentswhoarefullyproficientinDutch,attendingChineselanguageheritageclassesandlearningMandarinthroughthemeansofabook,i.e.,newspeakersofanoldlanguagelearningthrougholdmeansoflanguagelearning(Li2016).Inourapproach,weconsidertheobservededucationallanguagepracticesandmeta-pragmaticjudgementsoftheindividuallanguageusersinvolvedandweseethemasinitiatorsofbottom-upsociolinguisticchangethatwhileofferinggrassrootssolutionsforlocalchallenges,alsoplaysaroleaslocalevidenceforinforming-downlanguagepolicydevelopment. Languagepolicyforstabilityandhomogeneity Inthefieldoflanguagepolicydevelopmenttherecanbedistinguishedtwomainconsecutivehistoricalphases,thesebeing(1)languagepolicyconnectedtodecolonizationprocessesafterWorldWarIIand(2)languagepolicyconnectedtoimmigrationmovementsstartingintheearly1970s. Thefirstphaseoflanguagepolicymaking,isconnectedtoworldwidedecolonizationrelatedissuesinnewlyemergingnationstates.Heretheapproachtolanguagehadadualperspective.First,toestablishanationallanguageasabindingelementofthenewnationstatefollowingtheHerderianconstellationofonelanguage,onenation,onestate,oneterritory(Gal2006:378)andsecondlytogivearoleandaplacetoallofthe(other)indigenouslanguagespresentinthenewlybornnationstate.Fromthisstandpoint,languagepolicyandplanningtrytocaterforlanguagerelatedquestionsfromastronglyFishmanianunderstandingofthesociologyofagivenlanguageasafiniteentitythatstandstosymbolizenationalidentityandethnolinguisticidentification(seee.g.Fishman1989).Throughthisapproachlanguagepolicyandplanningetoolsforfosteringsociolinguisticstability,findingitspivotalpointinthehomogeneityofanationanditslanguage.Connectedtotheestablishmentofnationallanguages,atthesametimewealsoseelanguagepolicyandplanningasinstrumentsinanecologicallyorotherwisemotivatedendeavorforthepreservation,maintenanceand(even)revitalizationofminoritylanguagesinanefforttopreventlanguagelossandlanguagedeath(Ricento2016).Althoughatfirstsight,languagepolicymakingforsafeguardingminoritylanguagesmightappeartobetheoppositeoreveninconflictwithestablishinganationallanguage,such 13 538
M.Spottietal. endeavorsbasicallyoriginatefromthesameprinciple:theambitiontodefinealsoforminoritylanguagesanensembleoflanguagestatus,corpusandacquisitioninafixedtimeandspace,fulfillingagainthepurposeofconstructingsocietalstability.Theuseofthetermplanninginsuchcontextssubsumesanothersetofthoughtsaroundlanguagesandnationstates,i.e.,theperspectiveoflanguagediversity(i.e.peopleusingavarietyofmajorityandminoritylanguages)asaproblemandplanning(i.e.definingfixedforms,functionsandspacesofusefortheselanguages)asasolution.Thisapproach,irrespectiveofthesocietalchangesthathavetakenplacethankstoglobalization,seemstobestillinplaceacrossmanynationstatesaswellasacrossmanyoftheirinstitutionalenvironments,e.g.education,thatnecessitatelanguageplanning. ThesecondphaseinlanguagepolicymakinghasemergedinresponsetomigrationtoEurope,broughtaboutbyinternationaldecolonizationwaves,anintra-Europeandemandforcheapmanuallaborandbyunpredictable,yetongoing,movementsofasylumseekersbroughtbyconflicts,poverty,climatejeopardyandpoliticalfearofprosecution.Inthissecondphase,languagepolicyhastriedtopresentlanguageasafundamentalhumanrightandbilingualism,lateronaddressedasmultilingualism,asafactoflife,assomethingtobenurturedandpreserved(seeSpottiandBlommaert2017).Thiswaveoflanguagepolicingstartedwiththe1977CouncilofEuropeDirectiveontheEducationoftheChildrenofMigrantWorkersandmadelegalroomforsecondlanguageteachingaswellasimmigrantminoritylanguageteachingintheCommunity’smemberstates(seeReidandReich1992).Irrespectiveofthefactthateducationisastronglyregimentedinstitutionlanguagewise,whatteachersandstudentsdowithlanguageandhowtheyuselanguageineducation,maybewellfarawayfromthenormativeprinciplesspelledoutbylanguageplanning.Althoughlanguagepolicyinhandbooksis(still)mostlydealtwithintermsofCooper’s(1989)distinctionofstatus,corpusandacquisitionplanning,whichinformedmuchoftheworkdoneinthetwophasesoflanguagepolicymakingreportedsofar,ethnographicresearchintolanguagepolicyhas,inthemeantime,madeabundantlyclearthatthereisnosuchthingasastraightforwardandunproblematicimplementation-downlanguagepolicies(cf.McCarty2011).EvenifCooper’sworkhasbynowbeenengagedinamuchmoresophisticatedandcriticalfashion(seeGogonasandMichail2014;Hornberger2006;Pennycook2017)itremainsthatstatus,corpusandacquisitionstillmainlyfocusonaratherfixedunderstandingofwhatlanguageis.Anunderstandingthatnolongerfitsthesociolinguisticpracticesofcontemporarylanguageusersengagingintrans-andpluri-linguallanguaging(Arnautetal.2016,2017;Blommaert2010;BlommaertandRampton2016;Garcíaetal.2017a,b). Languagepolicyandglobalizationledmobility Inadditiontotheaboveconsiderationsregardingthelinkageoflanguagepolicieswithaspecificicityofinstitutions’andpeople’sownlanguageneeds(Blommaert2017)thatispotentiallyhamperingtheeffectivenessofsuchpoliciesinthelongrun,thereisalsoanotherpotentiallydisturbingaspect,i.e.,the 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 539 top-down-bottom-updivideinlanguagepolicymaking.Ifweponderforamomenttheexampleofateacherworkinginamultilingualclassroom,abottom-upperspectivewouldentailthisteacheranalyzingtheproblemsheisfacing,ingupwithalocalsolutionandthenimplementingitinherclassroom.Theday-to-daylanguageteachingpracticesthatresultfromthisprocessarebasicallyareflectionoflocalbottom-uplanguagepolicies.Johnson(2013)characterizessuchbottom-uppoliciesasmicro-level,covert,implicitanddefactopolicies-downpoliciesareinsteadmacro-level,overt,explicitanddejurepolicies.Bottom-updownpoliciesmoreoftenthannot,doappeartobeverydifferentfromoneanother,althoughtryingtofindasolutiontothesameproblem.Thismainlyrelatestoadifferenceinperspective.Thepractitionerineverydaypracticeisfacedwithparticipantsandtheirproblemsthatcannotwaitforpolicymakersfirstgoingthroughallthedifferentstagesofthepolicycyclebeforereachingapossiblesolution(Howlettetal.2009).Thepolicymaker,ontheotherhand,isinapositionthataimseupwithanapprovedpolicyplan.AsSpolsky(2004)noted,languagepolicycanindeedtaketheshapeofatextwithrulesandregulations,ithoweverhastobetakenupinpeople’slanguagepracticesandattitudesaswell.People’slanguagepractices,inasmuchastheirattitudesandtheirmeta-pragmaticjudgements,donotnecessarilycoincidewithwhathasbeendecideduponinlanguagepolicydocumentsdealingwiththesameissue.Theideasandpracticesofthoseinvolvedinsolvinglanguagerelatedproblemsonthegroundarebasicallyareflectionofbottom-up,grassrootspoliciesthatprovidelocalsolutionsforlocalchallenges,butatthesametimecanplayaroleaslocalbottom-upevidenceforacertainapproachinthetraditionalprocess-downpolicydevelopment. Where‘language’isdefinedasaverb,i.e.,‘tolanguage’,ratherthananoun,theconceptofaestoloseitsvalueandlanguageusersareinsteadunderstoodasbeingpartmunitiesofpracticeandknowledgethatshareanduselanguagerepertoiresandregistersconsistingofacontinuouslychangingensembleoflinguisticfeatures,stemmingfromtheirownandothers’linguisticresources,thatarethenmappedontothesociolinguisticfunctionsonehastofulfilwhenengagedinmunicativeexchange.Languagepolicymakingstillseemstolagbehind,engaged,asitis,indefiningthefunction,formandteachingofspecific,well-definedlanguagesinaspecifictimeandplace.Asaconsequence,languagepolicymakinglosestheconnectiontonewspeakers’everydaysociolinguisticpracticesandrealities.Asaremedytothisproblem,weproposetobypasstheaprioriassignmentofspecificsociolinguisticstatusestospecificmunicativeresources.Suchstatuses—e.g.theassumptionthatcertainresourcesare“English”,“standardEnglish”or“standardAmericanEnglish”(seePennycook2017)andtheassumptionthattheidentitiesofthosewhousethesevarietiesfallwithincertaincategories—shouldonthecontraryetheobjectofethnographicinterpretiveinquiry.Thiscallsintoquestionthepresupposedstabilityof“-lingualism”,asin“bi-”or“multi-”,andgivesprioritytolanguagebeingunderstoodasasetofsociolinguisticallyperformedempiricallyobservableformsmappedontofunctionsinwhichnewspeakersenotonlyconfrontedwith“languages”and“codes”,“-lects”and“registers”butalsowiththeideologicalby-productandthemeansthroughwhichsomeonelearns‘language’(seeSpottiandBlommaert2017).We 13 540
M.Spottietal. illustratetheabovebydiscussingtwocasestudiesin-downperspectivesonlanguagepolicymakingturnouttobe‘outdated’.Wepleadforanapproachthatfocusesonlanguagepracticesonthegroundwheretheunderstandingoflanguageisre-evaluatedandnewperspectivesforlanguagepolicymakingarebeingshaped(Jaspaert2015). Newspeakersofanewlanguagethroughnewmeansforlanguagelearning InboththepublicandpoliticaldiscoursesonintegrationofnewlyarrivedmigrantsintheNetherlands,wefindalanguagepolicyeffortthatdoesimplyintegrationthrough(inviting)newspeakerstolearnthe(official)languageofthehostcountry.WhiletheDutchdiscourseregardingintegrationusedtobeabiningDutchasaSecondLanguageaswellasethnolinguisticandethno-culturalidentitypreservationinlanguageclassesforstudentswithanimmigrantminoritybackground(Bezemer2003;Spotti2007),theNetherlandshasmeanwhilewitnessedadiscursiveshifttowardthelearningofDutchasthemainwayforintegrationintomainstreamDutchsociety.ofthis,recentlanguagepolicyeffortsbothataEuropeanandnationallevel(EUCommission2006)aswellastheformulationofpetencesforallEuropeancitizens(Ferrari2013),havebroughtintheuseofICTasthemeansthroughwhichfasterlinguisticandsocio-culturalintegrationcanbeachieved.Althoughregulatedbyaministerialdecreein2007askingtomakeintegrationtrajectoriesshorter,thepresentfieldofICTandintegrationthroughDutchasasecondlanguageesacrossasa‘FarWest’scenariowhereprivateandpublicproviderstaketheleadonthebasisoftheirlowcostsinhosting(online)Dutchasasecondlanguageclassesfornewlyarrivedmigrants(seealsoSpotti2011foracritiqueontheemergenceofthissector).Inwhatfollows,weexamineacaseofICTsupportedlearningofDutchasasecondlanguage.Indoingso,wedealwithaduallearningICTsupportedmethod(ITpreneurs2007)called‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’(DeVirtueleWijk)andwepresent,throughthemeansoffocusedgroupdiscussions,migrantlearners’ownperceptionoflanguagelearningandtheirreactiontothelanguagepolicyimplementationpelsintegrationclassestouseICT. ‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’intheclassroom Inthefollowing,were-appraisesomeresultsemergingfromanethnographicinterpretiveenquiryintomigrantstudents’drivesandbarrierstowardICT.Thisresearchwasconductedataregionaleducationalcenter,herecalledVondenland,backin2010(seeDriessenetal.2011).TheDutchlanguagecoursesprovidedatthecenterthatused‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’weresplitintwostreams:DutchLanguage(NederlandseTaal)andCivicIntegration(Inburgering)(cf.Vondenland2010).Thecivicintegrationcourseisaimedatnewlyarrivedmigrantswhoareengagedinanintegrationtrajectory.Coursesinpreparationtotheintegrationexam,including 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 541 languageproductionandprehensionhaveaponent,throughwhichthelearner‘learnstheDutchlanguagewiththehelpofexercisesandfilmsonputer’(cf.Vondenland2010:3).ICTsupportedsecondlanguagelearningcanbecarriedoutinclass,intheopenesslearningcenterorathome.Ifastudentwishestopursueapaidjobshewillbeassignedtothestream‘IntegrationandWork’.Ifastudentinsteadwishestobeengagedinchildrearingandhousekeepingtasks,sheisassignedtothestream‘IntegrationandPedagogicalSupport’.AsstatedbytheVondenlandcenter’sownpolicy: inordertobeintegratedstudentsmustlearntheDutchlanguageandbuildknowledgeofDutchsociety.Integratingmeansbeingabletofunctioninpracticalsituations,as–forinstance–atalkwithyourGP,withateacherorwithyouremployer.(Vondenland2010:2;ourtranslationfromDutch) Newspeakers’perspectivesontheirnewlanguagelearntthroughnewmeansforlanguagelearning Theclassunderstudyattheeducationalcentrehas17studentspreparingfortheintegrationexam.AllofthemfollowtheIntegrationandPedagogicalSupportstream.Theyareallwomenagedbetween21and56whohaveeitheralowormiddleeducationalbackground,exceptfortwoofthemwhohavefollowedhighersecondaryeducation.ThefirstgrouptobeinterviewedincludedMuhlisefromTurkey,TamusafromRussiaandArzoofromAfghanistan.MuhlisehasbeenintheNetherlandsforthepast9years,shemarriedaTurkishmanwhoalreadylivedandworkedintheNetherlands.Tamusa,instead,cametotheNetherlandsin1999becauseofherhusband’sjob.InRussiashewasalibrarianinalocalprimaryschool.ArzooarrivedasarefugeefromAfghanistanin2002andherintegrationtrajectory,followingtheregulationsspelledoutintheNetherlandsforintegratingnewlyarrivedmigrantshadtopletedinNovember2010.Noneofthemwereworking,thoughthelocalmunicipalityrequiredthemtocarryoutvoluntaryworkbecauseinsuchawaytheycouldpracticetheirDutch.Muhlise’sexperiencewithICTsislimitedtotheclassroomenvironment.Athome,infact,shehadnoPC;ArzooandTamusadidhaveaPCathomethattheyuseforkeepingintouchwiththeirhomecountriesbutalsoforlearningDutch.BothMulhiseandTamusaagreethatICTsmakeitdifficulttolearnDutchbecauseofthefeedbackthatonegets: Tamusa: Withverbs,difficultwithverbs,sometimesIdon’tunderstandwhattodowithverbs,whatdoIdowrong.It’samatterofunderstandingwhyIdosomethingwrong.Whatgoeswrong?
Whydoesitgowrong?
Givemegrammar Arzoo: Yeah,yeahsir,Idon’tunderstand,yougetwrong,wrong,wrong,goodbutthenwhywrong?
ItisnotthefirstlanguageIlearnbuthereIdon’tunderstand (Vondenlandfieldnotes2010:97;ourtranslationfromDutch) 13 542
M.Spottietal. While‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’helpstheminencounteringnewsituationsthatreflectreallifesettings,theyarealsoconfrontedwithspecificbitsoftheDutchlanguage,suchasthejargonofpaniesthatwasoftenmentionedinthefocusedgroupdiscussion. Whenconfrontedwithsuchvocabularies,thesestudentscouldnotfindtheirwayintheICTprogramfromwhichtheygetonlystraightforwardmechanicalfeedbackofrightorwrong.ThesecondfocusedgroupdiscussioninvolvedAmarandSera,bothrefugeesfromIraqwhocametotheNetherlands11and13yearsagorespectivelyandRana,whoisoriginallyfromAfghanistanandwhoetotheNetherlands12yearsago.Allofthemareloweducated.Serareportedtolookforwardtoherexamandthatsheiscurrentlyengagedinvoluntaryworkbecauseshewantstobeintouch‘withtheDutch’.Theyallhaveputerandaathome,whichtheyuseregularly: Amar: Iuseitforallsortsofthings,alsoforDutchRana: Yeah,yesterday,yesterday,youknow,yesterdayIuseditfortheexercises oftheintegrationprogramme,butIlovetalkingandwith‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’youcannottalkAmar: YeahRana: Andalsotheentcounts,wecannotpracticeentandthenwhenwetalk,weareforeigners,itisamatterofent,theyunderstandalotbutsometimeswhenItalktheylookatyou,likeIdon’tunderstand.’ IntermsoftheICTapplication,theconversationunfoldedasfollows Sera: Isearchforajob,Iamalmostdonewithfindingoneandthishelpsmeforajobforreallife,Iamalmostdone,itisimportantformetoknowwords,formychildren,formychildrenatschool Max: Andhowabouttheexercisethatyouhavedoneyesterdayandtoday,theexerciseofgoingtothelibrary?
Rana: Itwaseasy,easy,everydayyouusethesewordsoutsideAmar: WiththemouseIhavenotlearnedithere,Ihavelearneditbefore,beforeI didnotknowanything,twothreetimesandthenitisokSera: Iknewitalready,youdon’tneedschoolforusingamouse,thoughsome peopleheredidlearnithere(Vondenlandfieldnotes2010:97;ourtranslationfromDutch) Ontheonehand,RanaisnotsatisfiedbecauseofthelackofspeakingskillsinvolvedinthisICTapplication.Otherlearners,althoughtheyseethebenefitsofbeingexposedtoreallifesituations,alsocalluponalackofanypossibilitytopracticetheirent,ponentoftheirDutchlanguageskillsthatstillmakesthemsoundforeign.Last,theICTapplicationconfrontsthelearnerswithgenresandvocabularythatcanbeanobstacle.Thislackofexperiencewithacertainregister,though,ismoreadevelopmentstagethatlearnersmayencounterwiththeirDutchlanguagethanalimitationoftheICTapplication.NativeDutchspeakerstooarenotacquaintedwitheveryregister 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 543 ofDutch,asthereisnonativespeakerwhoknowshis/herlanguageasawholeandwhoknowshis/herlanguageperfectlywell.Thislackofregisterproficiencyesevenmoreproblematicwhenthereisalackofbackgroundvocabularyknowledge,asthelearnerdoesnotunderstandthedialogueassignedtoher.Anotherobstaclelearnersreportinworkingwith‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’isthattherearenowronganswers. Last,wehaveFiliz,andAkanan.FilizisofanoriginandaspeakerofanArabicaswellasofGermanasshehaslivedinGermanysinceshewas9yearsold.AkananisfromTurkey.ShehasleftthecountrytomarryaTurkishmanwhohaslivedintheNetherlandsfor23years.FilizreportstounderstandprettymucheverythingthatpeoplesaytoherinDutchthroughherknowledgeofGerman,butherspeakingandwritingskillsare,inherview,bothstillratherpoor.Furthermore,Filiz,attimes,doesnotknowwhycertainthingshappeninDutchandthatiswhentheuseofICT,suchasonlinedictionariesandgrammarbuddiesfromDutchtoGerman,einhandy.Whenaddressing‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’,FilizreportsthatthelevelofunderstandingthatisrequiredfromthisICTapplicationisfairlylow.However: Filiz: Thiswaseasy,easy,thelibraryiseasy,theschooliseasy,Iknowitbutthegrammarisverydifficult Akanan: Yeswiththechildren.Researcher:Andhowaboutgrammar?
Filiz: IunderstandeverythingandthenthenextdayIetaboutthefeedback puterhasgivenmeAkanan: Yes,yesformetoo.Grammar,difficult,Iamnotusedtowork- puter,mychildrendoit,Ilookforletters,whatdoIdo,whatshouldIdo,theyhavetohelpme.Grammarisbooksputer(Vondenlandfieldnotes2010:101;ourtranslationfromDutch) Summaryofcase1 Thedatacollectedduringthesefocusedgroupdiscussionsreportaparadoxinthat‘TheVirtualNeighborhood’,anapplicationthatmatches-downpolicyaimingatthedevelopmentoflanguageskillsinreal-lifesituations,infact,presentsnewspeakerswithadoublesetofobstacles.First,itturnedoutthatitwasnotalwayscleartothenewspeakerswhattheyshoulddowithlanguageintheICTbased‘reallife’situations,aregisterboundlanguagelearning,andwhetherwhattheydowithagivenregisterisright.Further,anobstacletoobtainoptimalresultsfromthisICTapplicationcouldbefoundinthelackoftechno-literacythatthesenewspeakersexperiencewhendealingwithICT-leadlanguagelearningandmorespecificallywithgrammar,somethingthattheyareusedtolearnfrombooks.Thesestudentsinplainedhavingtorespondtothepromptsgivenbytheapplication.Theyfeltthatforlearningaforeignlanguage,oneneedsbooks,rulesandagooddoseofgrammarwhiletheymissedoutonthedevelopmentmunicationskillsandintrainingtheirpronunciationwiththeirteacher.Theresulttheyreportedwasthattheyendedupmemorizingtherightanswerswithoutknowingwhetherand/orwhytheseanswerswereeitherwellorill-fittingmunicativeexchangeathand. 13 544
M.Spottietal. Newspeakersofanoldlanguage:observationsfromChinese heritagelanguageclassroomsintheNetherlands TheChinesebelongtotheoldestestablishedmunitiesintheNetherlands.July2011witnessedthe100yearsanniversaryofChinesepresenceintheNetherlands,whichwascelebratedwithaLionDancefeaturingacrewof100ChineselionsperformingattheDamSquareinAmsterdam(Li2016:19).FiguresofthenumberofChineselivingintheNetherlandsrangefrom84,310in2015(ordingtotheCentralBureauofStatistics’definitionintermsofpersons’ortheirparents’nationalityandcountryofbirth)and150,000(ordingtothemoreinclusiveestimatebytheChineseembassyintheNetherlands).Inthepre-1990sthemajorityofChineseimmigrantscamefromHongKong,ZheijangandGuandongandwerespeakersofCantonese.After2000,howeverthenumberofingfromZheijangandotherprovincesinmainlandChinahasincreasedtoover50%,mostofthembeingspeakersofPutonghua(pp.21–22). ThemunityinEindhovenprovidesanexcellentreflectionoftheabovesketcheddemographicdevelopmentanditsconsequencesforpeople’slanguageandidentityrepertoires.ThiscanbeperfectlyobservedintheChineseschoolinEindhoven,whichwasestablishedin1978bythemunitytoprovideCantoneselessonstochildrenofCantoneseorigin.Theschoolisplementaryorheritageschoolthatmunity-runandself-financed.In2012ithadover300childrenfromKindergartentograde12whoonSaturdaysfrom9.15to11.45mainlyfollowlessonsinMandarin(pp.25–26). Inwhatfollowswewilldiscusstwokeyincidents(KroonandSturm2007)thatillustratethepositionofDutch-ChinesenewspeakersinthepolycentricChineseclassroominEindhovenrunbyaChineseteacherwhomwecallhereMrsSun. Chineseclassrooms ThefirstepisodeinMrs.Sun’sclassthatwedealwithhereisateacher-leddiscussionofacurriculumtextwitheight(universityandhighersecondaryeducation)students,aged17–20.Mrs.Sun’sclassisveryheterogeneous:threestudentsareofHongKongCantonesebackground;twoareofWenzhounesebackgroundandoneeachisofFuzhouneseandMandarinbackground.TheclassroomlanguageisexclusivelyMandarinorPutonghua.Allstudentshavenative-likeproficiencyinDutch. Thetextthatwasdiscussed,‘Thesongofalittlebrook’,isawell-knownChinesefolkstory,writtenin1959duringChina’sBigLeapForwardcampaign,strivingtotransformChinaintoamunistsocietytroughindustrializationandcollectivization.Thestoryaimsatproducingandinstillingtraditionalvalues,collectivitymunityinthestudents.Thelittlebrook,runningthroughthelandscapetothesea,turningintoastreamandultimatelyabigriverisametaphorforthesocialistrevolutionandconstructionofChina,praisinghardworkandcollectiveachievement.AndthatexactlyiswhatMrs.Sunwantsherclasstogetoutofthetext.Heropeningquestionhowtheyfeelaboutthetext,howeverdoesnotleadtomuchinterest.‘Idon’thaveanyfeelingsaboutthistext’(我没有什么没感 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 545 受),MandarinbackgroundstudentTaosays,and‘Nothing’(没意思)WhenzouneseHongsays.Aftertheteacher’sexplanationofthemetaphoricalmeaningofthestory,thestudentsstartgivingtheirowninterpretationsofthetext.Taoforexample,reactstoMrs.Sun’sstatementthat‘theNetherlandsabsolutelymakespeoplelazy,makespeoplemakingnoefforts’(我觉得荷兰太让人不努力了)bystating‘DutchpeoplearemoreefficientthanChinese’(荷兰人比中国人efficiënt.中国人是没办法)culminatinginhisclaimthat‘mywayofthinkingisDutch’(我的想法是荷兰人的想法).InthatculturalframeworkthereisclearlynoroomforthemessageofatraditionalChinesefolkstory.AsLi(2016:56)concludes:“Whiletheteacherseemedtobelievethatteaching‘language’and‘culture’throughfolkstorieswasameansofreproducing‘Chinese’identityintheyoungpeople’sminds,theimpositionofsuchChinesenesswasexplicitlychallengedandrenegotiatedintheclassroom.ThestudentsassertivelyconsideredthemselvesDutchcitizensfullyparticipatingandentrenchedinDutchcultureandsociety,andrejectedthedeepermetaphoricalmeaningandmorallessonembeddedinthestory.” AnotherexampleofpetingperspectivesbetweenaChineseteacherandDutch-Chineseyoungstersisnicelyillustratedinateacher-studentclassroominteractionontoneinChineseinMr.Zhou’sclassattendedbyfourstudents(age16–19),twoofHongKongCantonese,oneofWenzhouneseandoneofmixedGuandongandHongKongbackground.Mr.Zhou,anearliermigrantfromGuandongprovincewhoisaspeakerofCantoneseaskswhocanmakeasentenceorgivethemeaninginDutchof本质(bĕnzhí,‘property’,pronouncedwithrisingtone).GuandongHonkongeseTongtonggivesthecorrectanswerbutalsoaskstheteacher:不是本质吗(‘Shouldn’titbebĕnzhì’,withfallingtone).Theteacherlooksatthebookagainandagrees:本质啊,应该读第四声啊,对不起(‘Bĕnzhì,ah,shouldbepronouncedwiththefourthtoneah,sorry’).Thesamestoryisrepeatedwiththewrongpronunciationof比较(bǐjiăoinsteadofbǐjiào)againcorrectedbyTongTongandotherstudentsandagreeduponbytheteacher.Li(2016:42)concludes:“ThisclassroomepisodepresentsaseriousdeviationfromthetraditionalChineselanguageclasswheretheteacherhasallthe‘knowledge’(…)Thelanguageteacher’spronunciationis‘corrected’byhisstudents.” ThisdocumentsthechangeintheChineseschoolfromonelanguageregime(Cantonese)toanother(Mandarin/Putonghua)andDutchChinesestudentsastheagentsofthischange,reflectinginthediasporaageopoliticalrepositioningofthePeoplesRepublicasaneweconomicworldpower. Inconclusion,thesetwoexamplescenteredaroundbeingaDutch-ChinesestudentindealingwithChinesemakeclearthattheclassroomisapolycentricenvironmentinwhichtheChineseschoolprovidesthelanguage(Mandarin/Putonghua)andthevaluesfromthePRC.Thestudentshoweveronlytakethelanguage(asmodity)andatthesametimechallengetheteacher’sauthorityregardingChineselanguageandvalues.Assuchtheschoolesasiteofconflict,contestationandnegotiationoverChinesenessfromaDutchperspectivebystudentswhoarepetentinDutchandwhoareatthesamepetentDutchnewspeakersofChinese. 13 546
M.Spottietal. Chineseonline InadditiontotheaboveofflineclassroomexampleswewillnowdealwithChineseyouth’smetalinguisticinteractiononline,morespecificallyfocusingontheDutchmediumteenageAsianandmunityontheDutchworksiteHyves(munitywasestablishedin2007byaCantonese-speakingChinese-DutchgirlwhostudiedChinese(Mandarin)plementaryeducationinAmsterdam.Itwascloseddownin2013afterFacebookhadtakenoverHyves.HerewewillhavealookatoneofthediscussionforumsontheAsianandProudHyve,asitwasintroducedApril20,2008at21:37byLeonandasked:WelkChineesdialectsprekenjullie?
(WhatChinesedialectdoyouspeak).Leonintroduceshimselfasfollows(originallyinDutch): I’mcantonesemyself☺imgoingtochineseschoolineindhoven,Ihavetolearn[Chinese]frommyparents-.-,, ButyeahIfindMandarinhardxD!
canunderstanditalittle,butcan’tspeakit>.
M.Spottietal. wantedthemtolearn“Chinese”aswellastheChineseschool’sfocusbininglearningChinesewithlearningChinesevalues.ThesespeakersofDutchandChineseintheNetherlandsseekandmanagetoacquiretheirownvoiceofflineaswellasonline.Indoingsotheyrepresentglobalyouthinasuperdiversesocietythateclecticallyoptsforthelanguageandidentityresourceseinhandyforachievingmunicativegoalsirrespectiveofthepoliciessetforthem. Thenewspeakerandthelanguagepolicyabyss Thetwocaseswehavereportedhereshowthatethnographyhasthepotentialofopeninguptheprocessoflanguagepolicymakingwhiletyingitdowntothoseactorsthatareinitiatorsofsociolinguisticchange.Moreconcretelyput,asalreadypointedoutbyHornbergerandMcCarty(2012),ethnographyshowsthatlargepolicystructuresandglobalizingforcesarereconfiguredinlocallanguageideologiesandpracticesor—astheytheorize—in“globalizationfromthebottomup”.Whattheseexamplesshowisthatthelanguageusersathanddonotseemtodothingswithlanguagefollowingtheexactwaysthatofficiallanguagepolicieswouldwantorexpectthemto.Itisexactlytherethatastartingpointcanbefoundfortransforminglanguagepolicymakingfrom-downtoabottom-upendeavor.AllovertheworldlanguageacademiesliketheNederlandseTaalunieintheNetherlands,FlandersandSuriname,theademiadellaCruscainItalyandtheAcadémieFrançaiseinFrance—allmembersoftheEuropeanFederationofNationalInstitutionsforLanguage(EFNIL)—dealwithrulesandregulationsaboutwhatisallowedandwhatisnotallowedinusing,mainlywriting,aspecificlanguage.Atthesametime,however,languageusersengagewithlanguageinpolylingualways(Jørgensenetal.2016),therebyusing,biningandbiningthelinguisticresourcesthattheyhaveavailablefromtheirsociolinguisticrepertoiressotoreachtheendgoalofhavingtheirvoiceheardwhenengagedinaninteraction.Theserepertoiresareinturnused–inmanycasesessfully—tomakemeaningmunitiesofpracticeandknowledgethatarenolongerstucktotheconceptofamunitywithafixedandprescribedlinguisticformandformat.Such‘poly-languagingpractices’arefarawayfromtheexclusiveandnormativeperspectivethattraditionallyseemstobeembracedbylanguagepolicies,aswellasbylanguagepolicyagentsandpoliticaldiscoursesregulatinglanguageacquisition,forexampleinintegrationcontexts.Assuchtheycanbeconsideredlocal,bottom-uplanguagepoliciesthatcanprovideempiricallygroundedinspirationforinstitutionallanguagepolicydevelopment. Thetwocaseswehavedealtwithinthiscontributionleadustothefollowingconclusions.Thealwaysexistingdistance-downpoliciesandbottomuppracticesinthefieldoflanguageseemstohavedevelopedintoanabysswhere‘newspeakers’ofbothnewandoldlanguageslearninglanguagethroughnewandoldmeansforlanguagelearningareinjeopardyofsinkinginto.Theactuallanguagepracticesandtheunderlyingattitudesthatcanbeobservedintimesofglobalizationledmobilityarenolongeravalidreflectionofinstitutionallysupportedlanguagepolicies,understoodas“anattemptbysomeonetomodifythelinguisticbehaviourofmunityforsomereason”asKaplanandBaldauf(1997:3) 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 549 wrotesomewhatmorethan20yearsago.Timeandpression,togetherwith-down-bottom-updivideaswellastheirpotentiallynegativeconsequencesfortheefficiencyandeffectivenessofconcretepoliciesmayapplytoallpolicymakingirrespectiveofthepolicyobjectunderconsideration,whetherthisislanguageorthemeansthroughwhichagivenlanguageshouldbelearntforagivenpurpose.Inthedomainoflanguagepolicy,however,thereisplicatingandpotentiallydamagingfactor,i.e.,theveryconceptof‘language’thatis(still)ingeneralusehereasisreflectedinforexamplemanyolderandnewerhandbooks(cf.Cooper1989;Johnson2013).Inorderforalanguagepolicytobeessfulincateringfortheneedsofnewspeakers,ithastoreorientitselftoadefinitionoflanguagethatincludespeople’slinguisticresources,registersandrepertoiresandtheirusesintheplexthough“ordered”realityoftheactuallanguagepracticesitshouldserve. Thedomainofactuallanguagepractices,inotherwords,canbeconsideredthemeetingplaceofformalpoliciesandnormsfromaboveandinformalpracticesandemergentnormsfrombelow.Forexactlythatreason,followingRicentoandHornberger(1996:419),wepleadforforegroundingtheagencyoflanguageusersindecidingonlanguagepolicies.Furthermore,giventhecutthatweembracehere,wepelledtoreflectonthepowerrelationsandpowerresultsthathaveshapedthepresentwaysofconceptualizinglanguage.Weought,infact,topayattentiontoemergentwaysofconceptualizinglanguagethatpeopleuseonthegroundand,indoingso,wehopetohaveshowedthatthoseemergentmoreinclusivewaysinwhichlanguagetendstobeused,bearinmindthepurposeof‘doingtogetherness’andconvivialityratherthanforevokinganddefendingevenfurthertheconstructionofdifferenceandinequality.Insodoingtheconceptofnewspeakermanages,infact,toavoidfallingintotheincrementalitythatcharacterizes,asMakoni(2012)denounces,the‘barrenverbiage’surroundingthecontemporarysociolinguisticdebateaboutlanguageandsociety. Acknowledgements ThisworkwassupportedbytheEuropeanCooperationinScienceandTechnologyaspartofEUCOSTActionIS1306entitled‘NewSpeakersinaMultilingualEurope:OpportunitiesandChallenges’. Openess ThisarticleisdistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0InternationalLicense(/licenses/by/4.0/),whichpermitsunrestricteduse,distribution,andreproductioninanymedium,providedyougiveappropriatecredittotheoriginalauthor(s)andthesource,providealinktotheCreativeCommonslicense,andindicateifchangesweremade. References Arnaut,
K.,Blommaert,
J.,Rampton,
B.,&Spotti,
M.(2016).Languageandsuperdiversity.NewYork:Routledge. Arnaut,
K.,Karrebæk,
M.,Spotti,
M.,&Blommaert,
J.(2017).Engagingsuperdiversity.biningspaces,timesandlanguagepractices.Bristol:MultilingualMatters. Bezemer,
J.(2003).Dealingwithmultilingualismineducation.AcasestudyofaDutchprimaryschoolclassroom.Amsterdam:AksantAcademicPublishers. Blommaert,
J.(2010).Thesociolinguisticsofglobalization.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. 13 550
M.Spottietal. Blommaert,
J.(2017).es,scalesplexityinthestudyoflanguage.InK.Arnaut,
M.Karrebæk,
M.Spotti,&
J.Blommaert(Eds.),Engagingsuperdiversity.biningspaces,timesandlanguagepractices(pp.47–62).Bristol:MultilingualMatters. Blommaert,
J.,Kelly-Holmes,
H.,Lane,
P.,Leppänen,
S.,Moriarty,
M.,Pietikäinen,
S.,etal.(2009).Media,multilingualismandlanguagepolicing:Anintroduction.LanguagePolicy,8
(3),203–207. Blommaert,
J.,&Rampton,
B.(2016).Languageandsuperdiversity.InK.Arnaut,
J.Blommaert,
B.Rampton,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),Languageandsuperdiversity(pp.21–48).NewYork:Routledge. Cooper,
R.L.(1989).Languageplanningandsocialchange.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Driessen,
M.,vanFuhri,
K.,Emmeren,
J.,Nygren-Junkin,
L.,&Spotti,
M.(2011).ICTuseinL2educa- tionforadultmigrants:AqualitativestudyintheNetherlandsandSweden.Seville:JRCEuropeanCommissionInstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies.EUCommission.(2006).Ministerialdeclarationone-inclusion.essed10Sept2011.Ferrari,
A.(2013).AframeworkfordevelopingandunderstandingpetenceinEurope.JRCScientificandPolicyReports.EuropeanUnion:LuxembourgPublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion.Fishman,
J.(1989).Languageandethnicityinaminoritysociolinguisticperspective.Clevedon,Philadelphia:MultilingualMatters.Gal,
S.(2006).Language,itsstakes,anditseffects.InR.E.Goodin&Ch.Tilly(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookofcontextualpoliticalanalysis(pp.376–391).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.García,
O.,Flores,
N.,&Spotti,
M.(Eds.).(2017a).TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.García,
O.,Flores,
N.,&Spotti,
M.(2017b).Introduction-languageandsociety:Acriticalpoststructuralistperspective.InO.García,
N.Flores,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety(pp.1–16).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Gogonas,
N.,&Michail,
D.(2014).Ethnolinguisticvitality,languageuseandsocialintegrationamongstAlbanianimmigrantsinGreece.JournalofMultilingualandMulticulturalDevelopment,36
(2),198–211.Hornberger,
N.(2006).Frameworksandmodelsinlanguagepolicyandplanning.InT.Ricento(Ed.),Anintroductiontolanguagepolicy:Theoryandmethod(pp.24–41).Malden,MA:BlackwellPublishing.Hornberger,
N.,&McCarty,
T.L.(2012).Globalizationfromthebottomup:Indigenouslanguageplanningandpolicyacrosstime,space,andplace.InternationalMultilingualResearchJournal,6
(1),1–
7.Howlett,
M.,Ramesh,
M.,&Perl,
A.(2009).Studyingpublicpolicy.Policycycles&policysubsystems.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.ITpreneurs.(2007).ThuisinNederlands:DeVirtueleWijk./watch?
v=VIHnHFRwizM.essed10Sept2011.Jaspaert,
K.(2015).Creatingquarterfordoingthingswithlanguage.EuropeanJournalofAppliedLinguistics,3
(1),21–45.Johnson,
D.C.(2013).Languagepolicy.NewYork:PalgraveMcMillan.Jørgensen,
J.N.,Karrebæk,
M.,Madsen,
L.,&Møller,
J.S.(2016).Polylanguaginginsuperdiversity.InK.Arnaut,
J.Blommaert,
B.Rampton,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),Languageandsuperdiversity(pp.137–154).NewYork:Routledge.Kaplan,
R.B.,&Baldauf,
R.B.(1997).Languageplanning:Frompracticetotheory.Clevedon:MultilingualMatters.Kroon,
S.,&Sturm,
J.(2007).parativecasestudyresearchineducation:Keyincidentanalysisandinternationaltriangulation.InW.Herrlitz,
S.Ongstad,&
P.-H.vandeVen(Eds.),ResearchonMTEinparativeinternationalperspective—Theoreticalandmethodological issues(pp.99–118).Amsterdam:Rodopi.Kurvers,
J.,&Spotti,
M.(2015).TheshiftinglandscapeofDutchintegrationpolicy:FromL1literacy teachingtoliteracyinDutchasentrancecriteriontotheNetherlands.InJ.Simpson&
A.Whiteside(Eds.),Adultlanguageeducationandmigration:Challengingagendasinpolicyandpractice(pp.173–186).Abingdon:Routledge.Li,
J.(2016).Chinesenessasamovingtarget.ChanginginfrastructuresoftheChinesediapsoraintheNetherlands.Ph.D.thesisTilburgUniversity.Makoni,
S.(2012).Acritiqueoflanguage,languagingandsupervernacular.MultasVozes,1
(2),189–199.McCarty,
T.(Ed.).(2011).EthnographyandlanguagePolicy.London:Routledge. 13 Newspeakersofnewandoldlanguages:aninvestigationinto… 551 O’Rourke,
B.,Pujolar,
J.,&Ramallo,
F.(2014).Newspeakersofminoritylanguages:Thechallengingopportunity.InternationalJournaloftheSociologyofLanguage,231,1–20. O’Rourke,
B.,Pujolar,
J.,&Ramallo,
F.(2015).Specialissue:NewspeakersandprocessesofNewSpeakernessacrosstimeandspace.AppliedLinguisticsReview,6
(2),145–150. O’Rourke,
B.,Pujolar,
J.,&Walsh,
J.(2017).LanguageeducationandNewSpeakersofminoritylanguages.InM.Stephen(Ed.),Encyclopediaoflanguageandeducation(3rded.)(‘LanguagePolicyandPoliticalIssuesinEducation’).NewYork:Springer. O’Rourke,
B.,&Ramallo,
F.(2011).Thenativenon-nativedichotomyinminoritylanguagecontexts:ComparisonsbetweenIrishandGalician.LanguageProblemsandLanguagePlanning,35
(2),139–159. Pennycook,
A.(2017).Languagepolicyandlocalpractices.InO.García,
N.Flores,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety(pp.125–140).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Reid,
E.,&Reich,
H.(Eds.).(1992).Breakingtheboundaries:Migrantworkers’childrenintheEC.Clevedon:MultilingualMatters. Ricento,
T.(2016).Commentary.InE.Barakos&
J.W.Unger(Eds.),Discursiveapproachestolanguagepolicy(pp.275–286).London:PalgraveMacmillan. Ricento,
T.,&Hornberger,
N.(1996).Unpeelingtheonion:LanguageplanningandpolicyandtheELTprofessional.TESOLQuarterly,30
(3),401–427. Spolsky,
B.(2004).Languagepolicy.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Spotti,
M.(2007).Developingidentities;Identityconstructioninmulticulturalprimaryclassroomsinthe NetherlandsandFlanders.Amsterdam:AksantAcademicPublishers.Spotti,
M.(2011).Ideologiesofessforsuperdiversecitizens:TheDutchtestingregimeforintegra- tionandtheonlineprivatesector.Diversities,13
(2),39–55.Spotti,
M.,&Blommaert,
J.(2017).Bilingualism,multilingualism,globalizationandsuperdiversity: Towardssociolinguisticrepertoires.InO.García,
N.Flores,&
M.Spotti(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookoflanguageandsociety(pp.161–178).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Vondenland.(2010).CurriculumvoorInburgering.InternalPublicationVondenland. MassimilianoSpotti isAssistantProfessorattheDepartofCultureStudiesanddeputyDirectorofBabylon,CentreforStudyofSuperdiversityatTilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands.Hismainresearchinterestsaremigrants,theiridentitiesandthesocietalandsociolinguistictrajectoriesanddiscoursesofinclusionandexclusiontheyarepartofduringtheirintegrationprocess. SjaakKroon isProfessorofMultilingualismintheMulticulturalSociety.HeisamemberoftheDepartmentofCultureStudiesandBabylon,CenterfortheStudyofSuperdiversityatTilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands.Hismainfocusinresearchandteachingisonlinguisticandculturaldiversity,languagepolicy,literacyandeducationinthecontextofglobalizationandsuperdiversity. JinlingLi gotherPhDon‘Chineseasamovingtarget’attheDepartmentofCultureStudies,TilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands.HerresearchinterestisinthefieldofChineselanguage,cultureandidentityinonineandofflinecontextsinChinesemunitiesinthecontextofglobalizationandsuperdiversity. 13
声明：
该资讯来自于互联网网友发布，如有侵犯您的权益请联系我们。