29.4859, Review: Applied Linguistics; Sociolinguistics: Lim, Stroud, Wee (2018)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-29-4859. Thu Dec 06 2018. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 29.4859, Review: Applied Linguistics; Sociolinguistics: Lim, Stroud, Wee (2018)

Moderator: linguist at linguistlist.org (Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté)
Homepage: https://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, 06 Dec 2018 10:21:19
From: Alicia Pousada [alicia.pousada.mejuto at gmail.com]
Subject: The Multilingual Citizen

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36415537


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/29/29-967.html

EDITOR: Lisa  Lim
EDITOR: Christopher  Stroud
EDITOR: Lionel  Wee
TITLE: The Multilingual Citizen
SUBTITLE: Towards a Politics of Language for Agency and Change
SERIES TITLE: Encounters
PUBLISHER: Multilingual Matters
YEAR: 2018

REVIEWER: Alicia Pousada, University of Puerto Rico

SUMMARY 

This edited collection of papers resulted from a 2007 workshop held in Cape
Town, South Africa titled “The multilingual citizen: Towards a politics of
language for agency and change.” The workshop was funded by Swedish and South
African research agencies and focused on articulating the concept of
“linguistic citizenship” and exploring its implications for an “empowering
politics of language for agency and change” (p. 3). “Linguistic citizenship”
(LC)  refers to situations in which “speakers exercise agency and
participation through the use of language (registers, etc.) or other
multimodal means in circumstances that may be orthogonal, alongside, embedded
in, or outside of, institutionalized democratic frameworks for transformative
purposes.” (p. 4).  Most of the papers contained in the volume critically
contrast LC with the prevalent Linguistic Human Rights (LHR) approach that
characterizes much research and activism regarding global multilingualism
today. Evidence supporting an LC perspective is provided from empirical case
studies in Cameroon, Mozambique, East Timor, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Sweden,
Malawi, and South Africa. Because the book is organized around the concept of
LC as articulated by editor Christopher Stroud in various papers which are
referred to by all the contributors (e.g., Stroud, 2001, 2009; Stroud & Heugh,
2004), the volume is quite cohesive.

The content is divided into three sections. Part 1: “Language rights and
linguistic citizenship” deals with definitions and theoretical concepts. Part
2: “Educating for linguistic citizenship” gives fieldwork-based evidence
concerning educational programs in several nations. Part 3: “Linguistic
citizenship in resistance and participation” discusses instances of local
activism and participation in other countries that follow an LC perspective.
The 13 chapters were contributed by 17 prominent researchers in the fields of
multilingualism, language contact, language planning, literacy, language
endangerment and revitalization, critical ethnography, critical discourse
analysis, and language and identity. While most of the papers are case
studies, three serve as critical commentaries upon other papers and indicate
points of disagreement regarding certain key theoretical issues. Various
chapters also contain retrospective statements that update and refine the
original content to take into account new developments which occurred over the
ten years it took for the published volume to come to fruition, 

In Part 1 of the book, Chapter 1: “Linguistic citizenship” by Christopher
Stroud (U. Western Cape & Stockholm University) contextualizes the volume and
delineates the LC framework, explaining why it is more effective in dealing
with development contexts than the LHR perspective. Chapter 2: “Essentialism
and language rights” by Lionel Wee (National U. of Singapore) explores the
problem of essentialism which plagues and weakens the LHR model. Chapter 3:
“Commentary—Unanswered questions: Addressing the inequalities of majoritarian
language policies” by Stephen May (U. of Auckland) critiques the preceding two
chapters and maintains that while he agrees with much of their criticism of
LHR, he does not consider that LC or deliberative democracy solve the problem
of language hierarchies of prestige.

In Part 2 of the volume, Chapter 4:  “Affirming linguistic rights, fostering
linguistic citizenship: A Cameroonian perspective” by Blasius A. Chiatoh (U.
of Buea) examines the case of Cameroon (where English and French have been
favored over the national languages since unification of the former British
and French colonies) and argues for a grassroots approach to language policy
that depolarizes the situation and strengthens the voice and identity of local
communities via revitalization efforts with an LC thrust. Chapter 5:
“Education and citizenship in Mozambique: Colonial and postcolonial
perspectives” by Feliciano Chimbutane (U. Eduardo Mondlane, Mozambique)
analyzes the different language policies that resulted from Portuguese
colonialism, Catholic and Protestant missionary work, anti-colonial liberation
struggles, and civil war. It criticizes the current early exit bilingual
education policy for not being explicit enough and for not obligating the
State enough in terms of implementation, leaving citizens to organize efforts
to force the State to develop participatory structures.

Chapter 6: “Paths to multilingualism? Reflections on developments in
language-in-education policy and practice in East-Timor” by Estêvão Cabral &
Marilyn Martin-Jones (Tilburg U., The Netherlands & U. of Birmingham, UK)
gives historical background on the Portuguese and Indonesian occupations of
East Timor but focuses primarily on language policy since the armed Resistance
resulted in independence in 2002. It provides detail on the transitional
mother tongue bilingual education model currently used to ensure use of mother
tongue national languages and Tetum as media of education in the early grades,
along with mastery of Portuguese and learning of foreign languages in the
later levels of schooling. Chapter 7: “Language rights and Thainess:
Community-based bilingual education is the key” by Suwilai Remsrirat & Paul
Bruthiaux (Mahidol U. & Language Consultant) lays out the language ecology of
Thailand which strongly privileges Standard Thai over regional varieties and
minority languages under the rationale that the official language is essential
to “Thainess.” The authors discuss the special situations of the Chong (whose
language is seriously endangered and now being revitalized via community
efforts) and the Patani Malays (whose Malay identity has not been recognized
by the central government, leading to deadly conflicts in the southern
provinces of Thailand). A pilot mother tongue bilingual program promises to
defuse volatile ethnic divisions and improve student academic outcomes.
Chapter 8: “Commentary—Linguistic citizenship: Who decides whose languages,
ideologies and vocabulary matter?” by Kathleen Heugh (U. of Adelaide) comments
on the LC implications of the four southern countries presented in Part 2,
drawing out their similarities and differences and signaling the ways in which
LHR programs are often “ineffective or used to amplify asymmetries” (p. 176)
and do not provide meaningful opportunities for community empowerment. The
chapter also analyzes the international debate over the term “mother tongue”
and warns of the dangers of trying to apply universal views of multilingualism
to different contexts.

In Part 3, Chapter 9: “Citizenship theory and fieldwork practice in Sri Lanka
Malay communities” by Umberto Ansaldo & Lisa Lim (U. Hong Kong) reports on the
case of the highly multilingual Sri Lanka Malay minority whose hybrid and
stigmatized language has been threatened by the current Sinhala Only policy of
the government. It describes community language revitalization and identity
realignment efforts that involve a conscious language shift to Standard Malay
to enable economic advancement, an act of LC that runs contrary to LHR defense
of mother tongue education and defense but which exemplifies local agency at
work and must be respected. Chapter 10: “Linguistic citizenship in Sweden:
(De)constructing languages in a context of linguistic human rights” by Tommaso
M. Milani & Rickard Jonsson (U. of Gothenburg & U. of Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg; and Stockholm U.) applies an LC perspective to a European
setting, showing how even in a “perfect” multilingual setting like Sweden
which recognizes the language rights of all groups, the lack of acknowledgment
of non-standard forms like Rinkebysvenska (an urban dialect of Swedish spoken
by immigrants and other youths in Rinkeby) leads to negative language
attitudes and covert rejection of immigrants. 

Chapter 11: “Linguistic citizenship in post-Banda Malawi: A focus on the
public radio and primary education” by Gregory Kamwendo (U. of Zululand)
examines the state of Malawi radio and primary school education since 1994
when the 30-year rule of Hastings Kamazu Banda and the Malawi Congress Party
ended and traces the process of opening up the airwaves to languages other
than Chichewa and English and the role of local language associations in
unblocking access to four other national languages. It also chronicles the
changes in primary education since the 1996 institution of the local mother
tongues as vehicles of education in grades 1-4 and English as the medium from
grade 5 on. In 2015, English was made the sole medium of instruction beginning
in the first grade in a misguided attempt to improve the English proficiency
of the students, leading to community reactions favoring English as the
hallmark of quality education and academic and NGO reactions advocating a
return to Chichewa. Chapter 12: “Making and shaping participatory spaces:
Resemiotization and citizenship agency in South Africa” by Caroline Kerfoot
(Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm U.) analyzes how and why
meanings were mobilized in adult basic education workshops organized by local
facilitators in the Northern Cape, utilizing a “pedagogy of possibility”
framework that prepared unemployed youths and adult participants to become
change agents in the resolution of key issues like alcoholism and deadly
childhood diarrhea in their communities. Chapter 13: “Commentary—On
participation and resistance” by Ana Deumert (U. of Cape Town) comments on the
contents of Chapters 9-12 and identifies the problems inherent in LHR programs
which are heavily invested in the State as actor. Deumert underscores the fact
that language functions differently in different locales and also draws
attention to the need to look at excluded and troublesome categories like
“noise” (loud, messy, violent expressions), “community” (often treated as a
uniform actor when it is inherently diverse), and “monolingualism” (generally
ignored in LC studies).

EVALUATION

The volume constructs a compelling and controversial critique of the popular
Linguistic Human Rights (LHR) approach to multilingualism and offers in its
stead Linguistic Citizenship (LC), a relatively new approach that goes beyond
government institutions and national borders. In his introduction to the
volume, Stroud explains that LC encompasses “what people do with and around
language(s) in order to position themselves agentively, and to craft new,
emergent subjectivities of political speakerhood, often outside of those
prescribed or legitimated in institutional frameworks of the state” (p. 4). LC
arose out of the contradictions of 1990s government and NGO-run mother
tongue/bilingual programs which only truly succeeded when community members
were able to use their local languages to obtain work, schooling, housing, and
medical care. LC practices are those in which vulnerable speakers exert
personal control over the varieties in their repertoires to avoid the
‘othering’ often created by programs purportedly seeking to defend linguistic
and cultural rights. Examples include the use of chants, placards, and songs
in South African street protests, the appropriation by Somali refugees in
Uganda of spaces and materials destined for English literacy teaching for
Arabic literacy development and Quranic study, and community members’ active
insertion of local language into a nutrition program in Mozambique.

Since LHR discourses are structured by the State and are based on
pre-determined and essentialist linguistic and cultural categories (e.g.,
“mother tongue,” “linguistic minority”), they may actually perpetuate
colonialist thinking and force speakers into inflexible, state-ordained
classifications that do not correspond to the complexities of their lives and
the fluidity of their identities. LHR efforts tend to view non-metropolitan
languages as requiring development or revitalization, which automatically puts
them into a subaltern position with regard to the metropolitan languages.
Because certain rights that apply to entire groups are sought, LHR programs do
not tend to promote diversity of voice or contribute to reciprocal “engagement
across difference” (p. 18). As Wee explains in Chapter 2, LHR discourses erase
key differences within groups and may even lead to modification of cultural
and linguistic behavior (cf. creation of “artificial” national languages) in
order to comply with the requirements for legal equality. Generally, mixed
language varieties and cultural groups are seen as less “authentic” and
therefore meriting fewer protections or rights.
   
In contrast, an LC perspective questions the historical, economic, and
political foundations of language practices and views citizenship as a social
institution in flux and not limited to nation states and their boundaries. LC
projects are utopian in the sense that they utilize the potentialities of
present situations to identify the conditions required for transformative
future changes. Recent insurgent citizenship movements like Black Lives Matter
in the U.S., Rhodes Must Fall in South Africa, and the Occupy protests in
Greece and Spain have provided new discourses and modalities for expressing
agency and participation (e.g., hashtag slogans, tattoos, use of public space,
stand-up comedy routines, etc.).  Another example is the Hip Hop opera
“Afrikapps” analyzed by Stroud in Chapter 1 which reappropriates the much
maligned variety of Afrikaans spoken by Blacks and “Coloreds” in Cape Town and
questions the classification of creole-origin Afrikaans as “pure,” “European,”
and the property of whites only. Such forms of expression challenge the
normative view of institutionally approved language seen in LHR discourses,
allowing new political voices to emerge.

The papers contained in this volume are united by the beliefs that
contemporary superdiversity and intercultural interaction demand boundary
crossing and multilingual fluidity and that existing language planning models
are insufficient to fully empower minority group speakers who live this
reality. The case studies in Part 2 of the volume focus on education in
Cameroon (Ch. 4), Mozambique (Ch. 5), East Timor (Ch. 6), and Thailand (Ch.
7). They make it clear that multilingualism is the norm in Africa and
Southeast Asia and that mixed varieties abound (e.g., Cameroonian Pidgin
English, Swahili, Timor Creole Portuguese). They also demonstrate that simply
having language human rights officially recognized (LHR framework) is not
sufficient to resolve the deeper sociopolitical and socioeconomic problems of
poor and marginalized communities. 

In African countries like Cameroon and Mozambique, educational programs that
seek to make a real difference and allow communities to create meaningful
change have to negotiate a complex linguistic landscape made up of hegemonic
European colonial languages (English, French, Portuguese) and multiple local
varieties that have had “the status of irrelevance and silence” (Chiatoh, p.
75) imposed upon them. In South East Asia, East Timor struggles to find a
balance between the colonially imposed Portuguese and Tetum (the Austronesian
majority language), along with smaller local languages, languages of global
communication like English, and Indonesian, the language of the former
occupying force which still controls the western part of Timor. In Thailand,
where 70 languages from five different language families co-exist, educational
solutions must address the existing hierarchical relationships among Thai (the
official and national language), its major regional variants, and the highly
endangered ethnic minority languages which are not spoken or respected by most
young community members.

The authors of the case studies presented in Part 2 illustrate the ways in
which an LC perspective could overcome some of the problems endemic to LHR
bilingual or multilingual models which tend to be transitional and
assimilationist in nature and clearly favor hegemonic metropolitan varieties
over marginalized local or tribal varieties. They emphasize the need to
utilize ethnographic studies in classrooms and communities to learn more about
grassroots efforts to revitalize indigenous languages which are
“invisibilized” by official bilingual language policies (e.g., the Chong
Language Revitalization Programme initiated by Thai villagers along the
Cambodian border, documented by Premsrirat & Bruthiaux in Chapter 7). 

The case studies presented in Part 3 show even more pointedly how an LC
framework can facilitate local activism. As Kerfoot explains in Chapter 12:
“Expanding citizen participation in public decision-making means both
incorporating previous marginalized groups into public politics and bringing a
wider range of socioeconomic issues into the domain of politics” (p. 281). The
projects examined are in Sri Lanka, Sweden, Malawi, and South Africa. They
reveal how broad and intergenerational involvement by multiple stakeholders in
programs aimed at developing language for societal purposes can be very
successful. They also address the role of hybrid language varieties in the
language repertoires of highly multilingual societies. Furthermore, the case
studies make clear that some grassroots initiatives may not seem appropriate
to linguists but must nevertheless be honored (the Sri Lanka Malays’
deliberate shift from their endangered vernacular variety to Standard Malay is
a case in point.) As Ansaldo and Lim state in Chapter 9, “shifts and choices
are never really intrinsically good or bad, but must make sense within the
targets that a group of speakers has in terms of social, political and
cultural positioning” (p. 211). 

The primary merits of this volume lie in its presentation of Linguistic
Citizenship (LC) as a conceptual model bolstered by case studies from mostly
non-European areas in which people’s economic and political struggles are
strongly linked to language and yet cannot be resolved by linguistic
interventions alone. It is also valuable for its demonstration of how
bottom-up language planning can be much more effective than government-imposed
top-down policies. As Cabral & Martin-Jones observe in Chapter 6, “more
attention should be given to local initiative and local participation in
bringing about and consolidating changes in language-in-education policy and
practice” (p. 139).  

Another strong point of the volume is its emphasis on heteroglossia and
multiple, competing voices that have been ignored for far too long.  Its
inclusion of hybrid language varieties as part of the active language
repertoire that needs to be tapped in mobilizing local communities to redress
social ills is particularly heartening, as is its inclusion of the multimodal
discourses and virtual voices that characterize digital communication today. 

In addition, the volume demonstrates quite clearly the danger of applying “one
size fits all” international models and categories in highly multilingual
areas of the world. As Heugh comments in Chapter 8: “The mapping of
educational approaches in one setting onto another, even if couched in
international discourses of language rights and equity, runs the risk of
layering new hegemony upon old.” (p. 186). 

A shortcoming of the volume for this reviewer is the lack of representation of
Latin American and Caribbean speech communities among the case studies. This
is most likely due to the research focus of the scholars at the original
workshop that led to the publication, although one might question why the call
for papers did not include Latin American and Caribbean concerns and
researchers from the outset. Future work on LC should consider how the LC
model fits with the Freirean approach utilized for literacy development and
political consciousness raising in various locations in Latin America and the
Caribbean.

The book should be useful to advanced graduate students and researchers
dealing with language planning in highly multilingual and developing areas of
the world. Economic and political policymakers and those interested in
comparative or international education and grassroots organizing by linguistic
or ethnic minorities will also benefit from its content. The theoretical
denseness of the writing and the extremely long paragraphs will be off-putting
to undergraduate readers, although the content of the book can certainly be
utilized by professors in the preparation of undergraduate classes.

REFERENCES

Stroud, C. (2001). African mother-tongue programmes and the politics of
language: Linguistic citizenship versus linguistic human rights. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 22 (4), 339-355.

Stroud, C. (2009). A post-liberal critique of language rights: Toward a
politics of language for a linguistics of contact. In J. E. Petrovic (Ed.),
International perspectives on bilingual education policy, practice and
controversy (pp. 191-217). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Stroud, C., & Heugh, K. (2004). Language rights and linguistic citizenship. In
J. Freeland & D. Patrick (Eds.), Language rights and language survival (pp.
191-218). Manchester, UK: St. Jerome Publishing.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Dr. Alicia Pousada is a Full Professor in the English Department of the
College of Humanities of the University of Puerto Rico at Rio Piedras. She
received a PhD in Educational Linguistics from the University of Pennsylvania
in 1984. Her teaching and research areas include: multilingualism, applied
linguistics, language policy and planning, the teaching of English as a Second
Language in Puerto Rico, language birth and death, and language and culture.
She recently published a collection of linguistic autobiographies titled Being
Bilingual in Borinquen: Student Voices from the University of Puerto Rico.





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

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:

              The IU Foundation Crowd Funding site:
       https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list

               The LINGUIST List FundDrive Page:
            https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-29-4859	
----------------------------------------------------------