30.4336, Review: Applied Linguistics; Sociolinguistics: Ahn, Smagulova (2017)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-30-4336. Thu Nov 14 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 30.4336, Review: Applied Linguistics; Sociolinguistics: Ahn, Smagulova (2017)

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Peace Han, Nils Hjortnaes, Yiwen Zhang, Julian Dietrich
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Jeremy Coburn <jecoburn at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:11:26
From: Melissa Hauber-Özer [mhauberr at gmu.edu]
Subject: Language Change in Central Asia

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36529677


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/29/29-2227.html

EDITOR: Elise S.  Ahn
EDITOR: Juldyz  Smagulova
TITLE: Language Change in Central Asia
SERIES TITLE: Contributions to the Sociology of Language [CSL]
PUBLISHER: De Gruyter Mouton
YEAR: 2017

REVIEWER: Melissa B Hauber-Özer, George Mason University

SUMMARY

This edited volume of empirical research was compiled with the goal of
increasing scholarly attention to Central Asian sociolinguistics. The book
focuses on how these newly independent nation-states have institutionalized
language and literacy policies after the fall of the Soviet Union,
particularly in order to revitalize titular languages and develop national
identities. It also examines language practices in light of cultural,
demographic, and economic changes, urbanization, and the politicization of
transnational ethnic identities in the region. 

The book begins with an introduction by the editors, Juldyz Smagulova and
Elise S. Ahn, which sets the social, geo-political, and ethno-linguistic
context for the compilation. This introduction reminds the reader of the
somewhat fuzzy boundaries of Central Asia, which is technically made up of the
former Soviet Union Turkic republics but, due to migration and transnational
ethnic ties, extends beyond these borders, including parts of Western China,
southern Siberia and Afghanistan. This framing chapter also establishes the
linguistic diversity and multilingualism of the region, comprising mainly
indigenous Turkic and Iranian languages while Russian continues to have a
lingering impact. In this context, the editors emphasize both the emergent
nature of empirical research on language policy, use, and education in the
region and the enormous potential for scholarship in these areas. These
nations, as we are reminded, have simultaneously navigated the post-USSR
project of establishing national identities, redefining relations with the
international community, and developing viable economies in distinct ways, and
language plays a crucial role in these dynamics. 

Stephen Bahry’s contribution, Language Ecology: Understanding Multilingual
Central Asia, follows with a literature review examining language change in
the region. Bahry employs a language ecology lens (Voegelin & Voegelin 1964),
which is place-based rather than language-based, to trace historical
developments, uses, and interactions of the numerous Turkic and Indo-Iranian
languages and dialects present within and across national boundaries. The
chapter highlights the dearth of research on bi-/multilingualism during the
Soviet period and asserts the importance of further interdisciplinary study on
multilingual practices, policies, and planning, particularly for non-titular
languages. This interesting contribution helps to contextualize the more
specific foci of the subsequent chapters within the region’s unique political,
social, and religious history and suggests an agenda for future research.

In Chapter 3, Nathan Light offers a linguistic anthropological analysis of the
use of habitual narratives in Kyrgyz through ethnographic interviews conducted
in villages in northwestern Kyrgyzstan. Through analysis of a series of vivid
narrative excerpts, Light draws attention to how participants expressed
singular and repeated events in the past and expressed cultural beliefs. In
this way, Light casts into doubt “assertions of tradition” (p. 41) based on
imposed generalizations and calls for linguistic ethnography to continue
uncovering “what people generalize about, when, and why” (p. 55). The study
illustrates the importance of understanding linguistic nuances in research on
cultural practices.

Elise S. Ahn and Antonia Jenson’s chapter follows with an examination of
Turkmenistan’s post-Soviet education system, in which extensive reforms were
implemented to increase the use and status of the Turkmen language in pursuit
of a national identity. Jenson, in fact, was invited to contribute to the
volume because of a lack of research on language change in Turkmenistan, and
autoethnography was selected to overcome the ethical challenges of conducting
research in a sensitive political context, in particular due to concerns about
protecting local participants. The resulting chapter provides fascinating
insights through the experiences of an English teacher into the influence of
political ideologies in the education system, embedded attitudes toward
foreign language and internationalization more broadly, and resulting
dissonance at the school level. 

The second section of the book consists of six chapters looking at the role of
language in nation-state building. In Chapter 5, Juldyz Smagulova discusses
educational efforts toward the re-acquisition of Kazakh in Russian-dominant
parts of Kazakhstan. This chapter begins with a fascinating overview of Kazakh
political and linguistic history, including shifts in the medium of education
and family language practices leading up to Kazakh language revitalization
efforts – both top-down and grassroots – as well as the lingering urban-rural
linguistic divide. Smagulova then uses mass survey data on language use,
reported proficiency, and beliefs to reveal social stratification and changing
identity among younger generations of Kazakhs.

Chapter 6, by Managat Shegebayev, examines technical corpus building for
Kazakh and Russian terminology in Kazakhstan’s growing oil and gas sector. In
this chapter, Shegebayev uses Cooper’s (1989) language policy and planning
framework to examine how language practices affect the actions of several oil
and gas companies throughout Kazakhstan and how translators and interpreters
handle terminology problems in this multilingual context and international
industry. The data, collected through surveys, questionnaires, and interviews,
reveals ongoing challenges and a need for professional development due to
changing technology, frequent high-stakes miscommunications, and a lack of
resources and standardization across companies. This study, though specific to
one industry, has important implications for those training translators and
for future language policy and planning in globalized industries. 

Stephen Bahry takes us to the Pamir region of Tajikistan in the next chapter
to examine societal multilingualism and personal plurilingualism using a
linguistic ecology lens (Voegelin & Voegelin 1964). With significant detail,
Bahry reviews the literature describing the complexity of language use in
home, community, and official domains in this remote, mountainous region as
well as the difficulty of accurate documentation. The chapter establishes,
among other themes, the challenges of developing literacy in (until recently
unwritten) local languages due to diversity and a lack of appropriate
materials. The result, which Bahry calls an “exploratory descriptive
synthesis,” is a very dense literature review covering somewhat dated
research. It does, however, convincingly argue the need for additional
research in this rich linguistic context. 

In Chapter 8, Daniyar Karabaev and Elise S. Ahn turn the reader’s attention to
Kyrgyz-medium schools in Tajikistan’s mountainous Badakhstan province. The
authors provide a helpful overview of Tajikistan’s post-Soviet development,
language policy, and centralized education system, which allows for minority
languages as the medium of instruction, although Tajik, Russian, and foreign
languages must also be taught. However, the authors highlight the severe lack
of appropriate teaching materials, qualified teachers, class time, and
exposure to Tajik speakers. In this context, Karabev and Ahn report the
findings gleaned from an interview study with educational stakeholders,
including administrators, policy makers, teachers, students, and parents in
Kyrgyz-medium schools. This study provides intriguing insights into how
stakeholders have adapted the policies and curricula to better meet students’
needs as well as how this system limits minority students’ access to higher
education and career options. 

Ruth Bartholomä then discusses Tatar nationalism and the controversy over the
introduction of a Latin script. Starting with a brief history of alphabet
reforms in Soviet Tatarstan – from Arabic to Latin to Cyrillic – this chapter
analyzes discourse about the attempted return to a Latin script at the end of
the 20th century, an apparent move toward symbolic independence mirroring
similar post-Soviet projects in Turkic-language-majority nations like
Uzbekistan. Bartholomä draws on interviews and textual analysis to determine
attitudes toward the proposed change among journalists and education
department employees, offering an interesting glimpse into the sometimes
contentious relationship between minority ethnolinguistic identity and
language policy.

Ablimit Baki Elterish addresses a move in the opposite direction in Chapter
10, the 2004 implementation of a policy changing the medium of instruction at
universities in China’s Xinjiang autonomous region from ethnic minority
languages to Chinese. Using a mixed methods approach including a questionnaire
(adapted from Baker 1992) and interviews, Elterish examines changes in
attitudes toward and use of Uyghur and Chinese among Uyghur students at one
such university three years after the introduction of this policy. The results
show high levels of reported bilingualism with an emphasis on the role of
spoken and written Uyghur in daily life outside the classroom. This chapter
highlights sociolinguistic dynamics of a lesser-known region that is
especially relevant in light of recent reports of aggressive Chinese
“reeducation” campaigns targeting Uyghurs (Sudworth 2019). It is clearly
written but depends on a somewhat dated (2007) study; it would be very
interesting to see a follow-up study indicating the longer-term impact of this
policy change. 

The book closes with a brief, final section under the heading of Globalization
and Language Change in Central Asia, which contains two empirical papers and
an afterword from the editors. In his informative Chapter 11, Leroy
Terrelonge, Jr. examines how Tajikistan’s educational and economic challenges
and language policies have affected labor migration to Russia through five
migrant workers’ narrative accounts. The chapter shares findings regarding the
importance of Russian proficiency in navigating challenges: obtaining accurate
information before migrating, arranging suitable housing in Russia, avoiding
police abuses, adapting to daily life in Russian society, finding skilled
work, and preventing exploitation. Terrelonge convincingly argues for an
investment in language education to boost Tajikistan’s struggling economy.  

On a similar theme, Dilbarhon (Dilia) Hasanova offers a helpful descriptive
overview of English education in Uzbekistan, with information on policy,
standards, pedagogical approaches, and challenges. For example, Hasanova
points out that despite efforts to incorporate communicative teaching methods,
many teachers prefer traditional, grammar-translation approaches. The chapter
is based on a qualitative study conducted between 2005 and 2007 – seemingly
the author’s dissertation research – which incorporated data from
questionnaires, classroom observations, and interviews with teachers and
secondary and university students. Hasanova provides extensive information on
English teaching at the preschool, secondary, and higher education levels and
students’ enthusiasm for learning English and highlights the need for further
curriculum reform and increased professional development, teaching resources,
and teacher salaries. Given the fact that this study occurred over a decade
ago, updated data would be interesting to learn whether conditions have
improved. 

Editors Elise S. Ahn and Juldyz Smagulova close the volume with a brief
afterword reiterating the complexity of language use, policy, and change in
Central Asia in the context of socioeconomic stratification and geopolitical
instability. They liken the book to a vertical case study (Vavrus & Bartlett,
2006) and reiterate the need for additional interdisciplinary, empirical work
on the region. 

EVALUATION

Overall, this volume offers unique glimpses into a fascinating multilingual
region undergoing significant social, political, and economic change. The
studies display a variety of research methods and data collection tools, from
more traditional questionnaire- and interview-based studies to less
conventional autoethnography. Authors approach the topics from diverse
professional viewpoints, including educators and researchers from linguistics,
sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, and anthropology. There is a good
variety of topical treatment within the broader theme and relatively even
coverage of the countries and territories in Central Asia, including the
semi-autonomous Tatar region of Russia and the Uyghur-populated Xinjiang
province in China. Despite this broad scope and the inevitable differences in
writing style and skill within edited volumes, the book is cohesive and offers
much of value. 

The insights provided in this book are not only useful for scholars of Central
Asian linguistics. The compilation is also relevant to readers interested in
language policy and planning in other linguistically diverse areas, as it
reveals the complexity of language attitudes, education, and use and offers
examples of possible research approaches. The contributions are, by and large,
accessible to non-linguists and highly informative for scholars from other
fields (e.g. Bahry’s Chapter 2 for historians). These perspectives on today’s
global economy and widening socioeconomic gaps between the ‘developed’ and
‘developing’ worlds and resulting variance in access to material and
intellectual resources are important to scholars from many fields. 

The volume naturally has some shortcomings as well. Despite the
interdisciplinary value outlined above, the title will likely initially appeal
to a limited audience already interested in language issues in Central Asia.
Several of the contributions also rely on data collected a decade or more ago;
it is understandable that publishing studies takes time, but given the
relatively rapid changes documented in the data from the first 10 or 15 years
of post-USSR independence, there has likely been quite a bit of subsequent
change not accounted for in these chapters. As noted, there is a range in
writing skill and style as well, which is to be expected in this type of
project, especially given that most of the contributors are not writing in
their primary language. As a result, some chapters lack polish, a problem that
would be easily mitigated by more attentive editing. There was evidently a
lack of attention to detail in the proofreading process with typos like “the
its society” (p. 71), incorrect comma placement in the number “756,4502” (p.
151), and improperly cited sources (e.g. Chapter 11). 

The compilation as a whole achieves its stated purpose, to draw attention to
Central Asian sociolinguistics by highlighting the linguistic, educational,
and political changes occurring in these recently independent states and
semi-autonomous territories. My existing interest in the region, especially
Turkic languages, drew me to the book, but I found that it has much to offer
to other scholars of sociolinguistics and educational linguistics. It presents
fascinating insights into a complex and diverse region and sets an agenda for
future research, policy making, and educational planning initiatives.

REFERENCES

Baker, Colin. 1992. Attitudes and language. Clevedon, England: Multilingual
Matters.

Sudworth, John. 2019, June 21. Searching for truth in China's Uighur
're-education' camps. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-48700786

Vavrus, Frances & Lesley Bartlett. 2006. Comparatively knowing: Making a case
for the vertical
case study. Current Issues in Comparative Education 8(2). 95–103.

Voegelin, Charles F. & Florence M. Voegelin. 1964. Languages of the world:
African fascicle
one. Anthropological Linguistics, 6(6). 1–149.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Melissa Hauber-Özer is a PhD candidate in International Education at George
Mason University. Her research focuses on language and literacy education in
migration contexts, and she is currently working on her dissertation research
with refugees in southeastern Turkey.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2019 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
               https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-30-4336	
----------------------------------------------------------