Documenting students’ conceptual understanding of second language vocabulary knowledge: a translanguaging analysis of classroom interactions in a primary English as a second language classroom for linguistically and culturally diverse students

1 Introduction

In recent years, the field of Applied Linguistics has witnessed a shift in the conceptualization of second language (L2) learning (e.g. Li 2018; Zhu et al. 2020a). Traditional views have emphasized the acquisition of named languages, focusing primarily on the mastery of grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation (e.g. Cook 1999; Selinker 1972, 1974). However, a growing body of research has begun to explore L2 learning as a complex process of translanguaging, which goes beyond the confines of named languages and encompasses the mobilization of various social, material, and embodied interactional resources (Ho 2022; Ho and Li 2021; Zhu et al. 2020a, 2020b). This paradigm shift recognizes that language users draw upon a wide range of linguistic and non-linguistic resources to participate competently in social interactions (e.g. Tai 2023a).

Alternatively, research on Conversation Analysis (CA) for Second Language Acquisition (SLA) has adopted the view of L2 learning as a ‘change in a socially displayed cognitive state’ (Seedhouse and Walsh 2010: 127). Cognition is perceived as ‘socially distributed between participants through their publicly displayed interactional conduct’ (Kasper 2006: 84) and such a view reinforces the need for researchers to capture the moment-to-moment qualitative changes of students’ linguistic improvements over a period of time (Tai and Khabbazbashi 2019). Prior classroom research studies that adopt CA as the methodological framework have revealed the interactional moments in which students’ changing cognitive states are observed in the sequential organization of actions and repair management (e.g. Matsumoto and Dobs 2017; Nguyen et al. 2022; Smotrova and Lantolf 2013; van Compernolle 2010). The findings of prior research reveal that such transformations occasionally entail a shift from exhibiting a lack of knowledge to demonstrating knowledge, while in other instances, they manifest as a gradual process of constructing understanding throughout the course of the interaction (e.g. Matsumoto and Dobs 2017; van Compernolle 2010).

So far, there is a lack of studies that examine how L2 students use translanguaging as a resource to demonstrate their conceptual understanding of the target language over the course of the classroom interaction. Furthermore, research investigating the utilization of translanguaging practices in contexts involving young learners remains limited (Sembiante et al. 2022; Vaish and Subhan 2015). Based on the data collected from a case study in a Hong Kong primary English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) classroom, this paper adopts translanguaging as an analytical perspective in order to address the following research questions:

1. How linguistically and culturally diverse students in a primary ESL classroom mobilise a wide range of multilingual and multimodal resources to demonstrate their conceptual understanding of their target language during classroom interactions?

2. How does the primary ESL teacher interpret and make sense of her students’ translanguaging practices as a means of externalising their conceptual understanding of L2 knowledge during classroom interactions?

In order to provide a comprehensive picture of students’ translanguaging practices as a means of externalizing their thought processes, this study will employ Multimodal CA to analyse the classroom interactional data in order to document changes in student’s conceptual understanding of L2 knowledge. The analysis of classroom interactional data will be triangulated with the video-stimulated recall interview with the teacher. The interview will be analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) in order to allow for an in-depth exploration of the teacher’s reflections on her students’ translanguaging practices for demonstrating their conceptual understanding. By incorporating multiple data sources and analytical approaches, this study endeavours to illuminate the intricate complexities of students’ translanguaging practices (Tai 2023a) and the potential benefits they bring to the context of L2 learning, particularly in terms of facilitating the teacher’s assessment of students’ understanding.

2 Tracking students’ conceptual understanding using conversation analysis

There is a growing number of studies (e.g. Eskildsen and Wagner 2015; Matsumoto and Dobs 2017; Ohta 2000; van Compernolle 2010) that employs CA to conduct micro-analysis of the classroom or peer interactions to understand how L2 development occurs through interaction. The goal of analysing L2 development is to ‘grasp the process in flight’ (Vygotsky 1978: 68). In other words, it is about capturing and tracing the moment-to-moment changes as they happen in interaction, instead of analysing L2 development based on the final results of some performance (e.g. a task). While L2 learning and development have typically been assessed through comparing the learning outcomes between experimental and control groups, most often entailing research designs based on pre- and post-tests to observe the products of change, little attention has been paid to exploring how L2 learning processes emerge in and through the minute details of the naturally-occurring interactions, and how L2 learning processes can be traced through detailed analysis of those minute details (Pekarek-Doehler and Lauzon 2015). Moreover, longitudinal research typically collects data periodically over a specific time span (Siegler 1995) due to their time-consuming nature and presents the small number of observations collected at widely spaced time intervals. This may fail to capture important moments contributing to development as learning may occur outside of the recorded data. Therefore, conducting fine-grained analysis of the classroom video data can potentially offer a comprehensive picture of the process of learning and development as contextualised in the moment-to-moment unfolding of interaction, and as embedded within jointly managed and locally accomplished courses of action.

In the realm of the sociocultural aspect of SLA, scholars (e.g. Ohta 2005; van Compernolle 2010) conceptualised L2 development as involving a qualitative transformation of a learner’s psychological functioning. This includes the internalisation of the L2 concepts that in turn affords learners conscious control over their L2 use, as evidenced in their ability to be more independent and utilise less support from external artefacts and expert others. Learning, on the other hand, only involves the quantitative accumulation of metalinguistic knowledge and/or discrete abilities (Wertsch 2007). Hence, adopting CA as a methodological tool can allow researchers to trace the process of L2 learning which leads up to the appropriation of the previously socially elaborated feature, such as an L2 vocabulary item, within a new interactional context (van Compernolle 2015). In order to make arguments about L2 learning and development, CA researchers ‘observe publicly displayed instantiations of distributed cognition as social behaviour’ (Schegloff 1989: 56) and change in participation, including the use of language, over time.

Ohta (2000) is one of the earliest studies that adopts CA to examine peer-assistance and ‘the interaction cues to which peers orient in order to provide developmentally appropriate assistance’ to one another (Ohta 2000: 52). Ohta described how two Japanese L2 students, Becky and Hal, assisted each other as they worked on assigned tasks (role-play task and the translation task) in a Japanese L2 classroom. Ohta argued that Becky successfully completed the task under Hal’s support and she was also able to use desiderative constructions consistently for her subsequent oral task with Hal. This study suggested that both learners constructed their L2 knowledge through interacting with each other and the findings emphasised the significance of constructing opportunities for learner participation in the classrooms. Moreover, the CA analysis of the interaction demonstrated that Becky’s appropriation process was publicly displayed through analysis of the peer interaction, which demonstrated her increasing autonomy in noticing and correcting her own errors without intervention.

van Compernolle (2010) investigated the incidental L2 development (i.e. learning some aspect of the L2 without the intention to learn) during a 35-min language proficiency interview between a teacher and an adult learner in French. The analysis demonstrates how CA can inform our understanding of L2 learning and development as publicly displayed over time. van Compernolle traced the L2 development in the learner’s use of everyday spoken form ‘t’aimes pas’ (‘you don’t like’) in the interview. It first began with the learner’s display of non-understanding which prompts the teacher to offer a simplified reformulation of the question. Later in the same interview, the same spoken form was understood by the learner and the learner initiated an appropriate answer to the teacher’s question to display his understanding. In the subsequent part of the interview, the learner employed the first-person equivalent of the spoken form ‘j’ aime pas’ in his spontaneous speech. Although the study only documented L2 development within a relatively short time frame (approximately 7 min), this study demonstrated that L2 resources (mediational artefacts) can be creatively appropriated or initiated in different ways in order to meet the learner’s communicative needs.

Moreover, recent research (e.g. Kimura and Kazik 2017; Matsumoto and Dobs 2017; Tai and Khabbazbashi 2021) has identified the role of gestures in contributing to learners’ L2 development. Matsumoto and Dobs (2017) employed CA to analyse two different level grammar classes (higher beginner and advanced level) in the intensive English programme at an American university. The authors observed that teachers often employed deictic and metaphoric gestures as resources to make abstract temporal concepts concrete and visible to learners. Importantly, when examining the interaction which occurred a week after the lesson, it was noticeable that a learner appropriated the teacher’s deictic gesture as a mediational resource to demonstrate his understanding of present tense, which is evidence of the learner’s L2 development. Although the authors only analysed one excerpt to explain the effects of gestures on learners’ L2 development, the analysis supported the claim that analysing both speech and gesture together allows researchers to understand the learners’ current knowledge state and their cognitive changes.

A recent study by Tai and Khabbazbashi (2021) conducted a 4-month longitudinal analysis to explore the potential for employing CA as the methodological tool for providing evidence of learners’ development of conceptual understanding of the meanings of particular vocabulary items which are previously explained. The key findings demonstrate that other than verbal resources, teacher’s use of embodied resources in explaining vocabulary items in the classroom plays an important role in facilitating the learners’ understanding of the meanings of different vocabulary items. The learner’s use of gestures allows her to externalise her understanding of the L2 word meanings and also allows teachers to evaluate the learner’s current knowledge states. These findings also suggest that CA provides some, albeit incomplete, evidence of the learner’s developing conceptual understanding of L2 word meanings and it allows researchers to investigate how these developmental changes occur in each interactional context of L2 vocabulary use.

The previously mentioned research (Matsumoto and Dobs 2017; Tai and Khabbazbashi 2021) shows that exploring the gestures of both learners and teachers in L2 classrooms is an important area of study that requires further investigation by researchers in SLA. To date, there is a lack of classroom interaction research that explores how students’ conceptual understanding of L2 knowledge is externalised through translanguaging. I argue that translanguaging can be a resource for students to externalise their internal thinking processes and provide diagnostic information for the teacher to assess students’ current knowledge state. Therefore, the aim of the study is to gather more evidence by analysing students’ use of diverse multilingual and multimodal resources in order to explicate students’ L2 developmental progress.

3 Translanguaging in L2 classroom interactions

The notion of translanguaging has been an influential concept in the field of Applied Linguistics. Li (2018) conceptualises the concept of translanguaging as a process of knowledge construction which involves drawing on various multilingual and multimodal resources. In other words, translanguaging as a fluid language practice challenges separatist ideologies and supports holistic, multimodal, and multicompetence perspectives of language pedagogy (Garcia and Li 2014). The transcending of modalities is an important part of translanguaging which distinguishes it from the notion of code-switching since code-switching focuses on analysing the structural aspects of the linguistic mode, without taking into account the multimodal aspect of meaning-making processes. Li (2011) has also developed a notion called ‘translanguaging space’ which refers to an interactional space created by and created for translanguaging practices. It is an interactional space where multilingual, multimodal and multi-sensory repertoires interact and co-produce new meanings.

Recent studies have investigated how teachers mobilise their linguistic and semiotic resources and different funds of knowledge into L2 classrooms to scaffold students’ content and language learning. Li (2014) explored how teachers and students in the UK Chinese heritage language classroom employ and negotiate the discrepancies in their linguistic and cultural knowledge and socio-cultural experiences while learning Chinese as a heritage language. Li argued that it is vital for teachers to think about how to employ the different funds of knowledge so that both the teachers and students can learn something new from each other. Zhu et al. (2020a) conducted research on a karate club in East London, which consisted of participants from diverse ethnic and linguistic backgrounds. The study revealed how the karate instructor skillfully utilizes a range of multilingual and multimodal resources in a creative and critical manner to facilitate the learning of L2 Japanese karate terms and effectively deliver his teaching. Zhu et al. argue that L2 learning entails going beyond the confines of specific languages and bridging the gaps between linguistic and non-linguistic modes of communication, which is known as translanguaging. Therefore, the goal of language learning should be to expand one’s communicative repertoire and develop the ability to transcend the boundaries not only between different languages but also between language and other systems of communication to construct and convey meaning. In the context of virtual L2 learning, Ho and Li (2019) examine the process of learning Chinese as an L2 via online platforms and they demonstrate how students connect the present L2 learning situation with past knowledge and experiences and mobilise different multilingual and multimodal resources in order to make sense the Chinese characters. In the context of English Medium Instruction, Tai (2023b) demonstrated that the EMI history teacher creates a translanguaging space by connecting different content-related knowledge that students have learnt from different timescales for scaffolding students’ learning of new academic knowledge. Such a translanguaging space enables teachers and students to bring in diverse multilingual and multimodal resources and multiple epistemologies that scaffold students’ content learning.

Based on the review of the studies, it is evidenced that translanguaging space is craved out by teachers and students deploying their whole multilingual, multimodal and multi-sensory repertoires for meaning-making. However, there is a dearth of research in the field of classroom interaction that investigates how L2 students’ translanguaging practices can serve as a valuable insight for teachers to assess students’ conceptual understanding of L2 knowledge during classroom interactions. Consequently, this study aims to address this research gap by closely monitoring the learning processes of L2 students and demonstrating how their evolving understanding are manifested through their translanguaging practices in classroom discourse.

4 Language education in Hong Kong context

The selection of the language of instruction in the educational system has been a highly contentious topic in Hong Kong for many years, particularly because the majority of the population speaks Cantonese as their L1. Generally, Cantonese is used as the medium of instruction for teaching most subjects in Chinese-Medium-Instruction (CMI) primary schools, while English is taught as a separate core subject, typically consisting of six to ten 40-min lessons per week.

Due to an increasing number of South Asian students in Hong Kong, some schools have enrolled students from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. According to the Legislative Council (2017), the population of ethnic minority students in HK schools has risen from 7,136 in 2005/2006 to 18,200 in 2016/2017, marking a significant 155 % increase over the span of a decade. Research indicates that although many South Asian students have either grown up or migrated to Hong Kong as children and are familiar with colloquial spoken Cantonese, they face racial discrimination in Hong Kong society and encounter difficulties integrating into Cantonese-speaking cultures. Moreover, they struggle to adapt to an educational system that does not acknowledge their community languages and identities (Pérez-Milans 2016). Consequently, the monolingual English-only policy, which restricts the use of English in language classrooms, does not align with the multicultural and multilingual environment that South Asian students have previously experienced during their upbringing. This situation may hinder their participation in English classrooms and impede their ability to learn L2 English knowledge from teachers.

5 Methodology

6 Analysis and findings

In the data collection, I have identified one case where students used L1 Cantonese to explain their understanding of vocabulary items, which is classified as a deviant case. Furthermore, three cases were found where students employed different body movements to demonstrate their understanding of action verbs. Additionally, two cases were observed where students utilized various paralinguistic resources, such as pitch, volume, and intonation, to convey their comprehension of adjectives for describing emotions.

In order to address concerns regarding the representativeness of the analysed extracts in this study, I have taken several aspects into consideration for reporting purposes:

1. Comparability to other extracts, both directly and indirectly, as suggested by ten Have (1990).

2. Inclusion of deviant cases, following Ford’s (2012) perspective.

As argued by ten Have (1990), regardless of whether the analysis focuses on a single-case or a collection of instances, CA is inherently comparative in nature. The analysed extracts are interrated to demonstrate recurring patterns of interactional features through similar instances of translanguaging practices or to showcase dissimilar ways of doing translanguaging (i.e. deviant instances).

In this section, I will analyse one deviant case which showcases students’ use of L1 to respond to the teacher’s question (Extract 1) and two representative cases which entail the students’ utilization of body movements to illustrate their understanding (Extract 2), and their employment of paralinguistic resources to display their comprehension (Extract 3).

6.1 Students’ use of L1 Cantonese to display their conceptual understanding of the meaning of a vocabulary item

Prior to the extract, the teacher (T) was reading aloud a storybook which was about cultural festivals in different countries. In the storybook, the male character Steve is Chinese and Eve is Japanese and T read aloud the sentences that were displayed in the storybook. After that, T asked students about the meaning of Chinese (line 14).

In line 14, T initiates the question, ‘does anyone know what Chinese means’, and points at the word ‘Chinese’ on the screen (Figure #1) in order to draw students’ attention to the word in the storybook. Subsequently, several students utter ‘yes’ concurrently (lines 16–20) to indicate their understanding of the meaning of ‘Chinese’. It is noticeable that Student 1 (S1), a Hong Kong student, translates the meaning of ‘Chinese’ in L1 Cantonese, “中:文:”, with an elongated sounds on both Chinese characters (line 21). The use of multilingual translanguaging here indicates the student’s conceptual understanding of the meaning of ‘Chinese’ in terms of the sense of the named language. However, T requires students to raise up their hands before answering her question (lines 23–25). After T nominates S1 to respond to her question (line 25), S1 repeats his L1 translation twice in lines 28 and 32 in order to reveal his understanding. In line 34, T first repeats S1’s L1 Cantonese translation as a way to recognise S1’s answer in Cantonese and she then acknowledges that Chinese is the name of a language by stressing the words “name” and “language’ (line 38). In line 39, T points at the word ‘Chinese’ again on the screen (Figure #2) in order to draw students’ attention to the word and in line 40, T utters the conjunction ‘but’ with stress in order to highlight that there is another possible meaning for ‘Chinese’. T also slows down her pace when she starts introducing the other possible meanings of Chinese in lines 40–42. T makes use of gesture, touching her chest with all her fingers (Figure #3), to bring herself under the spotlight and show that she herself is a person who comes from China in line 42, “this person comes from China”. To further highlight the sense of nationality to students, T prolongs the first syllable of the word “China” when introducing the fact to students that if a person is Chinese, the person is from China in line 42.

To check whether students could apply the taught concept (i.e., Chinese refers to both the named language and a person’s nationality), T invites students to comment on the other word ‘Japanese’ (lines 44–46), which is of a similar nature. A student utters in L1 Cantonese, ‘日文 (Japanese)’ in line 47 and such a multilingual translanguaging practice indicates his/her understanding of the word ‘Japanese’ as a named language (line 47). The other students repeat the word ‘Japanese’ asynchronously (line 49) without displaying their conceptual understanding of the word. T does not respond to these responses; instead, T goes on and invites students to raise their hands before answering the question. Student 2 (S2), a Hong Kong student, is being nominated to answer T’s question (lines 53 and 56–57) and he seems to be unsure of the answer as S2 utters the answer with a rising intonation and with a soft voice, “°she comes from Japan°↑?” (line 59). S2’s answer demonstrates her understanding of the meaning of Japanese which refers to a person from Japan and T positively recognizes the accuracy of S2’s answer by uttering ‘very good’ in line 61. Yet, S2 seems to be unsure about his prior response as he utters the next response with a rising intonation, “°come° °from there↑°?” (line 63). T intends to move on, as denoted by the overlapped utterances in lines 63 and 64. T explicitly states that S2’s answer is “correct” (line 66) and continues with her teaching by reinforcing the fact that “Japanese maybe it’s a name of a language” (line 70) but it can also mean “this person comes from Japan” (line 76). It is noticeable that T’s gesture (extending her arm and moving her left-hand to point at Eve) (Figure #4, line 78) also suggests the idea of an alternative meaning of ‘Japanese’ which refers to the person “where they come from” (line 82).

In this extract, it is evidenced that several students in the class demonstrate their conceptual understanding of ‘Chinese’ and ‘Japanese’ as named languages using L1 Cantonese. However, the students do not use translanguaging to illustrate their understanding that these terms can also refer to a person’s nationality. It can be argued that the students’ use of translanguaging in this case only provides partial evidence of their conceptual understanding of the meanings of ‘Chinese’ and ‘Japanese’. It is important to note that this is the only instance observed over a three-month period where the teacher and students used a language other than English to co-construct meaning in the classroom (Fieldnotes). This limited use of translanguaging may be attributed to the school’s monolingual policy, as stipulated by the English Panel Head. In a video-stimulated recall interview, the teacher explains how the school’s language policy has influenced her pedagogical approach and restricted the students’ use of other named languages in the classroom (Table 1):

Table 1:

Video-stimulated-recall-interview (Extract 1).

Classroom interaction transcript	Video stimulated recall interview excerpts	Teacher’s perspectives	Analyst’s interpretations of the teacher’s perspectives
	01 K: 我留意到姐係 ((tr. I have noticed that)) 02 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 03 K: 姐係平時呢就上堂呢 ((tr. In typical English lessons)) 04 T: 嗯 ((tr. Um hm)) 05 K: 姐係無乜呢個 er use of L1 嘅 ((tr. There aren’t many moments when you are tapping on students’ L1)) 06 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 07 K: 咁哩一個呢就係一個幾好 example ((tr. So l think this is a nice example))		In the interview, the researcher points out that this particular moment of the interaction is unique as it documents T’s creation of a translanguaging space which allows students to utilise a language other than English, specifically Cantonese, to demonstrate their understanding of the meanings of ‘Chinese’ and ‘Japanese’. The researcher is intrigued and seeks to comprehend the underlying motivations that prompted T to employ Cantonese during that specific moment of interaction.
	08 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 09 K: tap on 佢哋嘅， 即佢哋 familiar 嘅 L1 咁樣啦 ((tr. Tapping on students’ familiar language)) 10 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 11 K: 會唔會可於講吓， er 哩個 moment ((tr. Can I invite you to discuss more about this particular moment of the interaction?)) 12 T: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 13 K: 點解哩個 moment 會 肯用 L1呢， 之前就唔肯用咁樣呢 ((tr. Why you would choose to use L1 here which deviates from the use of English as the primary language?))
	14 T: 姐係， 因為平時係學校我哋都係用翻 English only， 姐係 English only 嘅 medium for English， 其實係科主任都係唔建議我哋中文， 咁啱呢個學生呢， 姐係識點答果個意思啦， 咁我覺得係可以接受， 跟住我就會 translate 翻啦 ((tr. I see, because normally at school we use English only as the medium for English. In fact, even the department head does not encourage the use of Chinese. So, for this particular group of student, they were able to display their understanding of the meanings of the words. So, I think it’s acceptable for them to use L1 Cantonese. Then, I would proceed to translate it into L2 English for them.)) 15 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes))	T points out that the English Panel Head expects English teachers to use English only during English lessons. However, in this situation, she thinks it’s acceptable for students to use their familiar language.	This is because the word meanings of “Chinese” and “Japanese” relates to countries, its people and its language. It makes sense of students to use Cantonese to demonstrate their understanding of “Chinese”, for example.
	16 T: 咁我覺得做一個老師， 如果果個學生係明嘅話呢， 我覺得係唔可以話咁樣唔比去姐係講咁樣 ((tr. In my opinion, as a teacher, if the student understands, I don’t think it’s right to withhold or refrain from explaining it to them in students’ familiar language.)) 17 T: 所以我就係諗緊， 啊如果可以用翻啲 translation 啊， 都係佢哋 mother language 咁樣都會好啲， 只係 at the same time 我都要跟翻果個規矩囉， 姐係如果， 係哦寫翻啲 translation 啦， 會唔會變咗， 啊哩個唔係一個 real authentic 嘅 English lesson， 姐係對學校黎講係無咩咁囉 ((tr. So I’m thinking, if I can use translations in their mother language, it might be better. However, at the same time, I still have to adhere to the rules. If I use translations, would it change the nature of the lesson? It may not be a real authentic English lesson from the school’s perspective.)) 18 K: 嗯嗯嗯嗯嗯 ((tr. Yes yes))	The English teacher acknowledges that the school’s language policy primarily emphasizes the use of English as the medium for English instruction. The department head further discourages the use of Chinese in the classroom. However, the teacher recognizes that in certain cases, such as with this particular group of students, allowing the use of their first language (L1), Cantonese, can facilitate their understanding of the subject matter. The teacher finds it acceptable for the students to utilize Cantonese to demonstrate their comprehension.	Consequently, the teacher takes on the responsibility of translating the content into English (L2) to ensure the students’ learning progression in the target language. This demonstrates how the school’s language policy influences the teacher’s instructional approach, striking a balance between promoting English proficiency while considering the students’ linguistic needs.
	19 T: 係啊， 就係咁樣囉， 姐係我知係會幫倒學生， 只係學校會有諗 this is an English lesson， 點解你會用好多唔同語言呢 ((tr. Yes, that’s how it is. I know it would help the students, but the school might question why I’m using multiple languages in an English lesson.)) 20 K: 係， 都係有個難處係度嘅 ((tr. Yes, there is a difficulty in this situation.))	The teacher believes that in the process of learning and teaching, it is important to prioritize student understanding. From her perspective, if a student comprehends the content, she believes it is not appropriate to withhold or avoid explaining it in the students’ familiar language. The teacher also finds herself in a challenging situation. While she understands that incorporating multiple languages would benefit the students’ learning, she is mindful of the potential scrutiny they may face from the school. The teacher recognizes that using different languages in an English lesson may raise questions regarding instructional practices.	I argue that this approach reflects the teacher’s belief in promoting effective communication and ensuring that students can grasp concepts and meanings accurately, regardless of the language used. Balancing the students’ needs with adherence to school policies becomes a delicate task for the teacher, highlighting the complexity of navigating instructional decisions within the constraints of institutional expectations.

In the interview, the researcher points out that this particular moment of the interaction is unique as it documents T’s creation of a translanguaging space which allows students to utilise a language other than English, specifically Cantonese, to demonstrate their understanding of the meanings of ‘Chinese’ and ‘Japanese’. The researcher is intrigued and seeks to comprehend the underlying motivations that prompted T to allow students to employ Cantonese during that specific moment of interaction. In line 14, T points out that the English Panel Head expects English teachers to use English only during English lessons. However, in this situation, she thinks it is acceptable for students to use their familiar language. It can be argued that the meanings of words such as “Chinese” and “Japanese” are closely tied to countries, their people, and their respective languages. Therefore, it is reasonable for students to utilize Cantonese to showcase their comprehension of the term “Chinese,” for instance.

T also acknowledges that the school’s language policy primarily emphasizes the use of English as the medium for English instruction. The department head further discourages the use of Chinese in the classroom. However, T recognizes that in certain cases, allowing the use of students’ familiar, Cantonese in this case, can facilitate their understanding of the subject matter. T finds it acceptable for the students to utilize Cantonese to demonstrate their comprehension. Consequently, T takes on the responsibility of translating the content into English (L2) to ensure the student’s learning progression in the target language. This is evident in the MCA analysis where T had to translate students’ use of Cantonese into the target L2 English equivalent (e.g. lines 38–42 and 70–80). This demonstrates how the school’s language policy influences the teacher’s instructional approach, which requires T to strike a balance between promoting English proficiency and considering the students’ linguistic needs. In the subsequent part of the interview, T believes that in the process of learning and teaching, it is important to prioritize student understanding. From her perspective, if a student comprehends the content, she believes it is not appropriate to withhold or avoid explaining it in the student’s familiar language. I argue that this approach reflects the teacher’s belief in promoting effective communication and ensuring that students can grasp concepts and meanings accurately, regardless of the language used.

Hence, it can be suggested that T is aware of the benefits of translanguaging in allowing students to demonstrate their conceptual understanding of target vocabulary items. However, the belief that only English is the favoured language in the classroom implies that standardized English language practices are superior (Kimura and Tsai 2023; Rajendram 2022). T feels ambivalent about converting her awareness into translanguaging actions out of fear of violating the institutional English-only policy in L2 English lessons. As noted by T in line 19, T finds herself in a challenging situation and she recognizes that using different languages in an English lesson may raise questions regarding instructional practices. This reveals that balancing students’ needs with adherence to school policies becomes a delicate task for T, highlighting the complexity of navigating instructional decisions within the constraints of school-level expectations.

6.2 Students’ use of body movement to reveal their conceptual understanding of action verb

Prior to the extract, T was guiding students to notice how they could transform a verb into an action verb by adding the prefix -ing. T invited students to read aloud different action verbs which were projected on the screen (Figure #5). It is noteworthy that the teacher supplemented each vocabulary item with corresponding GIFs, allowing students to visually observe the associated actions for each verb. After students read aloud the word ‘hopping’, T invited students to compare the difference between ‘hopping’ and ‘jumping’ (line 1). In this extract, it is evidenced that students are using their body movements to differentiate the meanings between these two action verbs.

In lines 1–7, T invites students to consider the difference between ‘hopping’ and ‘jumping’. In particular, T nominates S1 to explain the difference (line 5). However, S1 interestingly does not explain the difference verbally. Instead, S1 uses his body movement to show the difference between ‘hopping’ and ‘jumping’. In line 9, S1 first utters ‘hop is’ and then he performs a light jump physically as he enunciates ‘like’ concurrently in line 11. Here, it is evidenced that S1 taps on both linguistic and multimodal resources (i.e., English utterances and physical movement) to demonstrate his understanding of ‘hopping’. Furthermore, S1’s adaptation of the physical action depicted in the GIF on the screen can be viewed as a manifestation of translanguaging. This process allows S1 to showcase his understanding and personalize the action to make it his own. After T utters a minimal token ‘uh huh’ to acknowledge S1’s action, S1 utters ‘°like this°’ in a soft voice in order to complete the sentence that he constructed in lines 9 and 11.

T positively acknowledges S1’s utterance and physical action in line 16 and she invites S1 to explain the meaning of ‘hopping’ once again so that all students in the class can see S1’s physical illustration of ‘hopping’ (lines 20–22). It is noticeable that in line 23, both S1 and S9, use their body movement to demonstrate the action of hopping (Figure #6) as they perform a light jump in their seats. Although S9 is not nominated by T to explain the meaning of ‘hopping’, S9’s initiative in enacting the physical action of ‘hopping’ demonstrates his understanding of the meaning of the word. After T acknowledges S1’s and S9’s use of body movement in lines 24–25, T initiates another question, ‘and how about (.) jumping’ (line 27). During the 1.3-s pause (line 28), it is evidenced that both S1 and S9 respond to T’s question by springing off the ground with the use of their feet (Figure #7). Such a multimodal action displays their understanding of the meaning of ‘jumping’. After S1’s and S9’s physical enactment, T continues to use English to summarise the difference between ‘jumping’ and ‘hopping by explaining their ‘your body is a lot straighter’ when you are jumping (line 31) and ‘hopping is a little lower’ (line 35). Concurrently, T bends down her knees and hops once in line 35 (Figure #8). This moment demonstrates how T adapts students’ physical movement of ‘hopping’ in order to allow all students in the class to visualise the contextual meaning of the word.

In this extract, it is evident that students demonstrate their understanding of the vocabulary items through the use of multimodal translanguaging. In the MCA analysis, both S1 and S9 utilize body movement instead of verbal explanations to showcase the distinction between “hopping” and “jumping”. It can be argued that both S1 and S9 creatively adapt the actions depicted in the GIF images on the screen in order to highlight their comprehension of the action verbs. The process of making physical movements on one’s own is a form of translanguaging, where participants mobilise available resources to convey particular meanings appropriately and spontaneously in a specific interactional moment (Ho and Li 2019). Towards the end of the interaction, T summarises the difference using English and incorporates the students’ physical movement of “hopping” to enhance the whole class’s visualisation of the word’s meaning. During the video-stimulated-recall-interview with T, she elaborates on her pedagogical goal of accommodating diverse learning needs among students and how that creates a translanguaging space where students can utilise diverse multimodal resources to construct meanings (Table 2):

Table 2:

Video-stimulated-recall-interview (Extract 2).

Classroom interaction transcript	Video stimulated recall interview excerpts	Teacher’s perspectives	Analyst’s interpretations of the teacher’s perspectives
	01 K: 跟住你望到啲學生係到跳來跳去啦 ((tr. Here we can see that students are jumping around)) 02 T: 哈係 ((tr. Haha yes)) 03 K: demonstrate 一個 action of em ((tr. Demonstrating the action of)) 04 T: jumping 哈哈 ((tr. Jumping)) 05 K: jumping 呀咁樣， 其實呢啲你會唔會有啲乜comment啊 ((tr. Jumping. Yes. So do you have any comments about this??)) 06 T: 嗯 ((tr. Um hm)) 07 K: 姐係我就覺得係demonstrating understanding 囉 ((tr. In my opinion, this is an example of students demonstrating their understanding))		The researcher argues that in this moment of the interaction, students demonstrate their understanding of the vocabulary items through the use of various body movements, which is an example of multimodal translanguaging (Jiang et al. 2022).
	08 T: 係， 姐係我覺得啊呢一個 lesson 果陣時， 我我都記得啲學生係比較活姐係活躍啲， active 啲， 我覺得係無咩問題， 姐係因為咁啱係學緊 action， 咁如果佢哋做倒果個 action， 姐係 doing 果個 movement in the classroom， 我覺得係非常好啦， 因為 er 如果佢坐定定， 唔 show 果個 understanding, 我覺得係無用囉 ((tr. Yes, I feel that during this particular lesson, I noticed that the students were more active and engaged. I don’t see any issues with that because it aligns with the goal of learning action words. If they are able to perform the actions and engage in movements within the classroom, I believe it is excellent. It demonstrates their understanding, as opposed to just sitting passively without showing their comprehension.)) 09 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes))	T strongly believes in the value of allowing students to utilize multimodal actions to showcase their conceptual understanding of action words. This active involvement aligns perfectly with the objective of learning action words. By doing so, students not only demonstrate their comprehension but also actively apply their knowledge.	T highlights that this stands in contrast to passive learning, where students might simply sit without actively expressing their understanding. T emphasizes the importance of cultivating an environment that encourages students to use their bodies as a means of expressing and reinforcing their understanding of action words.
	10 T: 咁啱學生係學緊 jumping， 佢 show 倒果個 action， 咁我已經知佢係明白 ((tr. During the lesson, the students were learning about the word “jumping”, and several students demonstrated the action. Seeing that, I already knew that they understood the concept.)) 11 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes))	By accepting body movements as a means of expression, T gains a deeper understanding of each student’s grasp of the lesson content.	T’s statement highlights the significance of using body movements as a form of multimodal translanguaging, which offers valuable insights for assessing students’ understanding.
	12 T: 佢哋應該係個 er learning style 係比較 er kinaesthetic 呀， 姐係 move learn by moving 嘅， 咁啱個 topic 就係關於 action word， 咁比佢郁囉， 係啊 ((tr. They seem to have a learning style that leans towards kinesthetic learning, where they learn best through movement. It aligns well with the topic focused on action words, allowing them to engage and learn through physical actions. It’s a good fit for them.)) 13 K: 係 ((tr. Indeed)	Through careful observation, she identifies that some students possess a kinesthetic learning style, where they thrive and absorb information best through movement.	This awareness becomes particularly relevant when teaching a topic centered around action words. By allowing these students to engage in physical actions, the teacher acknowledges the importance of aligning instructional methods with their preferred learning style. This approach not only fosters active participation but also enhances their understanding of the subject matter. I also argue that the teacher’s commitment to addressing diverse learning needs fosters an inclusive and effective learning environment for all students.
	14 T: 因為平時就， 姐係如果平時上堂呢就一定要叫啲學生姐係坐定定， 要 sit quietly 啦， 咁咁啱呢一堂係關於 action word， 咁佢想做果個 action 就 okay 啦 ((tr. Normally, during regular class sessions, students are expected to sit still and remain quiet. However, in this particular lesson on action words, it is acceptable for the students to engage in physical actions and perform the corresponding actions.)) 15 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 16 T: 係啊 ((tr. Yeah)) 17 K: 係啊係啊， 我覺得係幾好呀， 因為學生係真係， show 佢個 movement of jumping and hopping 啊 ((tr. That’s right! It’s evident that students use different body movements to differentiate the difference between jumping and hopping))
	18 T: 嗯， 係啊， 知道因為佢哋咁細個啦， 尤其是忍， 佢哋係忍唔住係要郁囉 ((tr. Yes, that’s right. I understand that because they are young, especially when it comes to being patient, they can’t help but fidget or move around.)) 19 K: 嗯 ((tr. Exactly!)) 20 T: 所以我覺得係無乜問題， 姐係呢一堂係無乜問題， 哈哈哈 ((tr. Therefore, I don’t see any issue with them jumping around)) 21 K: 係係係， 我覺得小學生就係要去郁吓 ((tr. Exactly! I think primary school students should be moving around!))	The teacher’s belief, as expressed in the statement, showcases a deep understanding of the students’ learning styles and needs. By recognizing that traditional expectations of sitting still and remaining quiet may not be conducive to effective learning in every situation, the teacher demonstrates a commitment to creating a positive and inclusive learning environment.	Allowing students to engage in physical actions and perform corresponding actions in a lesson on action words not only accommodates diverse learning styles, but also provides an opportunity for students to actively demonstrate their understanding. I argue that T’s pedagogical beliefs enables her to construct a translanguaging space where students can comfortably express themselves and participate fully in the learning process. The teacher’s awareness and efforts to foster inclusion and enable students to showcase their comprehension are commendable and contribute to a more engaging and effective classroom experience.

At the beginning of the interview, the researcher points out to T that students in the class were able to demonstrate their understanding of the vocabulary items through the use of various body movements, which is an example of multimodal translanguaging (Jiang et al. 2022). T strongly believes in the value of allowing students to utilize multimodal actions to showcase their conceptual understanding of action words. This active involvement aligns perfectly with the objective of learning action words. By doing so, students not only demonstrate their comprehension, but also actively apply their knowledge. I argue that T highlights that this stands in contrast to passive learning, where students might simply sit without actively expressing their understanding (Li 2016). T’s statement highlights the significance of using body movements as a form of multimodal translanguaging, which offers valuable insights for assessing students’ understanding.

Additionally, T firmly believes in recognizing and accommodating the diverse learning needs of her students. Through careful observation, she identifies that some students possess a kinesthetic learning style, where they thrive and absorb information best through movement. This awareness becomes particularly relevant when teaching a topic centred around action words. By allowing these students to engage in physical actions, T acknowledges the importance of aligning instructional methods with their preferred learning style. This approach not only fosters active participation but also enhances their understanding of the subject matter. I also argue that the teacher’s commitment to addressing diverse learning needs fosters an inclusive and effective learning environment for all students (Tai 2022). Therefore, it can be argued that T’s pedagogical beliefs enable her to construct a translanguaging space which fosters inclusion and enables students to showcase their comprehension, which contributes to a more engaging and effective classroom experience for students.

6.3 Students’ use of paralinguistic resources to display their comprehension of the meanings of adjectives for expressing emotions

Prior to the extract, T played a YouTube video which illustrated different adjectives for describing emotions. The video showcased words such as “happy,” “sad,” “angry,” “surprised,” “scared,” “shy,” “sleepy,” and “hungry.” The lesson’s focus was on feeling words. In the following extract, which occurred 5 min after the video, T aimed to reinforce the students’ understanding of these adjectives. To do so, she displayed images representing each adjective alongside their corresponding words before reading them aloud.

In line 1, T shows the image of a person being angry (Figure #9) and she makes use of paralinguistic resources, body movement and facial expressions to express the meaning of ‘angry’. She stares at the students and places both of her hands on her waist (Figure #9) and utters the adjective ‘an:gr:y↓’ with elongated sounds, stress, falling intonation in order to express her anger. After a short pause (line 2), students repeat after T but it is noticeable that students enact the sound of being angry by yelling. This is evident as they yell the adjective with elongated sounds, stress and falling intonation, “AN:GR::Y↓” (line 3). This is an example of translanguaging since it illustrates how students appropriate T’s utterance by creatively using paralinguistic features including stress, intonation, elongated sounds and sound volume, in order to demonstrate their understanding of the meaning of ‘angry’.

T moves on to the next example which depicts a frowning scared face on the screen (Figure #10) and places both of her hands on her head when she utters the sentence: “I’m scar::ed” (line 8; Figure #11). When T utters the adjective ‘scared’, T raises her voice to a very high pitch and prolongs the vowel of the word “scared”. T’s use of linguistic resources is accompanied by the visual representations on the screen which permit T to showcase the meaning of the word “scared” without giving a wordy descriptive definition of the adjective. It is evident that, in line 10, the students imitate T’s pronunciation of “scared” by shrieking at a significantly high pitch, as though they are genuinely frightened when they echo T’s words. Moreover, the students elongate the sounds while saying “scar::::::ed” (line 10). This resonates with a situation where people scream in a loud and prolonged manner when they are in fear. Such a translanguaging practice allows students to showcase their comprehension of the emotion and to convey the sense of fear.

T does not provide any verbal acknowledgement to S’s enactment in line 10, possibly because T assumes students understand the meaning of ‘scared’. In line 12, T switches to the next PowerPoint slide and reveals the next image with a happy face and the sentence “I’m excited” (Figure #12). In line 13, T raises both of her hands above her head to create a positive vibe (Figure #13). In addition, T stresses and prolongs the second and third syllables of the word, ‘exci:te:d↓’, in order to show her excitement. It is evident that students repeat after T synchronously and some students demonstrate their understanding of ‘excited’ by mimicking T’s manner of utterance, that is, prolonging the second and third syllables of the adjective ‘excited’ in line 16. Some students even scream to show that they are exhilarated when they utter the adjective in order to convey a sense of excitement.

Similar to the analysis of Extract 2, students demonstrate their understanding of adjectives for describing emotions by appropriating various resources. They engage in translanguaging by creatively using paralinguistic features like stress, intonation, and elongated sounds to imitate the T’s manner of utterances. T’s uses of visual representations and embodied gestures also aid students’ comprehension, allowing them to express emotions accurately. Throughout the interaction, T relies on students’ active engagement and effective utilization of multimodal resources as evidence of students’ understanding of the meanings of adjectives. During the video-stimulated-recall-interview with T, T explains how she observes students’ enactment to assess their current state of conceptual understanding (Table 3):

Table 3:

Video-stimulated-recall-interview (Extract 3).

Classroom interaction transcript	Video stimulated recall interview excerpts	Teacher’s perspectives	Analyst’s interpretations of the teacher’s perspectives
	01 T: 咁我覺得其實啲學生都係對呢個 topic 都 familiar 嘅， 佢哋都識好多唔同 emotions， 咁因為 emotions 係比較 abstract 嘅嘢呢就， 跟住咁啱我又要用姐係啊帶口罩嘅 ((tr. So, I think actually the students are all familiar with this topic. They know a lot of different words related to emotions. Because emotions are more abstract, then, at the same time I needed to use masks during the lesson.))	The teacher acknowledges the inherent challenge of teaching these abstract concepts as her facial expressions are hindered by the need to wear masks during the lesson.
	02 T: 所以有時候呢， 佢哋又唔係好睇到我嘅表情， 咁我用翻我啲 voice to show 唔同 emotions 啊， 咁如果睇翻條片呢， 啲學生都可以 imitate 果個 feeling個 emotion through their voices 嘅， 咁我覺得如果下次呢， 我覺得有可以進步果個位就係有可能唔洗戴口罩， 只係姐係 show 倒個 facial 嘅姐係 reaction 啊， let’s say if you are feeling happy or sad， 咁樣姐係我覺得對學生會清楚啲嘅， 但係咁啱係疫情， 所以係要戴翻個口罩 ((tr. So sometimes, they can’t really see my facial expressions clearly, so I rely on my voice to show different emotions. If we look at the video, we can see that the students can imitate the feeling or emotion through their voices. So, I think if next time, it’s possible that I don’t have to wear a mask and I can just show my facial reactions. Let’s say if you are feeling happy or sad. I believe that would be clearer for the students. But currently, due to the pandemic, it is necessary to continue wearing masks.)) 03 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 04 T: 係啊 ((tr. Indeed)) 05 K: 咁我見倒呢係呢個 example((tr. So based on this example)) 06 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 07 K: 姐係當然我哋見到學生啊都好， 大家係度尖叫啊 ((tr. Of course, when we see the students, we are all excited and screaming.))	Recognizing that facial expressions may not be clearly visible, she utilizes her vocal repertoire to effectively demonstrate different emotions. The teacher envisions a future where she can freely showcase facial reactions, as it would provide even clearer understanding for the students, especially when depicting emotions like happiness or sadness. However, she understands the current necessity of wearing masks due to the ongoing pandemic, prioritizing the safety and well-being of everyone involved.	The teacher strongly believes in adapting to the circumstances and finding alternative methods to effectively convey the word meanings related to emotions to her students. Despite the challenge of masks obstructing facial expressions, she effectively conveys different word meanings related to emotions through her voice. By observing videos, it is evident that students can imitate and understand the feelings and emotions portrayed through their voices. The teacher’s and students’ use of vocal repertoire serves as an example of translanguaging by leveraging different tones in order to communicate the nuances of various emotional states to her students.
	08 T: 係啊 ((tr. Yes)) 09 K: 姐係 demonstrate 緊佢哋個 understanding 啦 ((tr. They are demonstrating their understanding.)) 10 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 11 K: 可唔可以講吓你用果啲 images 吖 ((tr. Can you tell me more about the images.)) 12 T: 係 ((tr. Yes)) 13 K: 姐係我見倒都有用啲類似 emoji 果啲啊 ((tr. I noticed that you were using emojis during the lesson)) 14 T: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 15 K: 果啲個 inspiration 係邊度黎 ((tr. What’s your reason for including these emojis?)))
	16 T: 哦， 因為呢 er 之前我有諗過啊用唔同學生嘅樣 ((tr. Right. I did consider using students’ facial expressions)) 17 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 18 T: 又係咁啱呢因為疫情呢， 就姐係唔係可以比佢地姐係隨便除口罩嘅， 咁我之後就係諗緊， 咦會唔會有個 character 呢係可以 show 倒唔同嘅 characters ((tr. Again, it’s just that due to the pandemic, we can’t casually remove our masks. So, I have been thinking, maybe there could be a character that can portray different characters.)) 19 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 20 T: 姐係唔同嘅 emotions 嘅， 咁啱就係哩個 character 係可以 show 倒， 姐係好清楚， 姐係如果一個人係 sad or happy ((tr. That means this character can show different emotions. In that case, it would be very clear if a person is sad or happy.))	T suggests that she did consider drawing on students’ facial expressions to facilitate the teaching of word meanings related to emotions. Due to the pandemic, she wasn’t allowed to invite students to remove their masks and show their facial expressions as a way to assess their understanding.
	21 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yeah)) 22 T: 咁 inspiration 黎講呢， 只係覺得， 嗯， 要搵吓最清楚， 姐係啲 pictures 可以 show 倒比佢哋睇， 姐係原本如果真係唔係疫情嘅話呢， 我就會 invite 好多唔同 students 啦， 就係 show 唔同嘅 emotions ((tr. Speaking of inspiration, I just feel that, well, to find the clearest way, pictures can show it to them. If it weren’t for the pandemic, I would have invited many different students to show different emotions.)) 23 K: 嗯 ((tr. Yes)) 24 T: 姐係 in front of the class， 跟住我諗又可以比其他學生 guess 一 guess， 姐係之後呢 as a consolidation， guess what kind of emotion are they feeling ((tr. In front of the class, then I thought I can also let other students make a guess. Then afterwards, as a consolidation, guess what kind of emotion they are feeling.)) 25 K: I see	The teacher’s belief is rooted in the understanding that visual representations can effectively communicate complex concepts, allowing students to grasp and relate to different emotional states.	Although the pandemic has posed challenges, the teacher remains adaptable and resourceful in finding alternative approaches to inspire and engage students.

During the interview, T acknowledged the inherent challenge of teaching abstract concepts related to emotions while wearing masks, which hindered her facial expressions. However, she discovered that despite this obstacle, she was able to effectively convey different word meanings associated with emotions through her voice. This observation was supported by the MCA analysis, which revealed that students were able to imitate and comprehend the feelings and emotions conveyed through their voices. This situation highlights how T and her students utilized their vocal repertoire as a form of translanguaging. By leveraging different tones, they were able to communicate the nuances of various emotional states during classroom interactions. This demonstrates T’s adaptability and resourcefulness in finding alternative approaches to inspire and engage students, even in the face of pandemic-related challenges.

T’s ability to navigate the limitations imposed by mask-wearing and effectively utilize her vocal repertoire, along with her students’ engagement in imitating emotions, exemplifies translanguaging. It can be argued that T’s flexibility created a translanguaging space within the classroom, allowing students to demonstrate their understanding of word meanings by mobilizing their own vocal repertoire to imitate different emotions. This interactive process not only fostered a deeper comprehension of emotions but also encouraged students to actively participate in the learning experience.

7 Discussion and conclusion

In this paper, it is evident that students are orchestrating their full multilingual and multimodal resources to demonstrate their conceptual understanding of the L2 knowledge. Particularly, students employ these resources to allow for an externalisation of thinking processes which provides visible output for inspection by the teacher and peers. This study aims to fill in the research gap and demonstrates how students’ translanguaging practices can be treated as a kind of diagnostic information for ESL teachers to assess their conceptual understanding. In Extract 1, I have presented how students demonstrated their conceptual understanding using L1 Cantonese. The extract illustrates that while some students used L1 Cantonese to demonstrate their understanding of “Chinese” and “Japanese” as named languages, they did not employ translanguaging to illustrate their comprehension of the terms as referring to nationality. Therefore, the use of translanguaging, in this case, provides only partial evidence of the student’s conceptual understanding of the meanings of “Chinese” and “Japanese”. In Extract 2, the teacher introduced the concept of action verbs by adding the prefix -ing to base verbs. The teacher used GIFs to visually represent the actions associated with each verb. In the extract, the students were asked to differentiate between “hopping” and “jumping.” The extract highlights how students used multimodal translanguaging, combining body movement and English utterances, to demonstrate their understanding of action verbs. They creatively adapted the actions from the GIFs to personalize their demonstrations. This process of making physical movements their own can be seen as a form of translanguaging, where students mobilize available resources to convey meanings in a spontaneous and appropriate manner. In Extract 3, the teacher aimed to reinforce students’ understanding of adjectives for describing emotions. In this extract, the teacher used paralinguistic and multimodal resources, such as body movement, facial expressions, and vocal features, to express the meanings of different adjectives. It is evident that students imitated the teacher’s English pronunciation and manner of utterance, adjusting their volume, pitch, and elongating sounds to convey the corresponding emotions. This practice of translanguaging allowed students to showcase their comprehension and convey the intended emotions effectively.

In response to the first research question, I have demonstrated that the teacher relied on students’ active engagement and effective utilization of multilingual and multimodal resources, including L1 Cantonese, multimodal actions, and paralinguistic features, as evidence of their understanding of L2 vocabulary items. Prior research on translanguaging in multilingual classroom contexts has revealed how L2 teachers can draw on their funds of knowledge to promote students’ content and learning in different multilingual classroom settings, including L2 classrooms (e.g. Creese and Blackledge 2010; Galante 2019; Tai 2023c) and EMI classrooms (e.g. Phyak et al. 2022; Tai and Li 2021). Nevertheless, there is a lack of research that conducts fine-grained analysis in order to track students’ process of L2 learning and development in the moment-to-moment unfolding of interaction. It is suggested that the results of such fine-grained analysis of classroom discourse can provide some aspects of students’ L2 development as embedded within jointly managed and locally accompanied sociocultural activity (Tai and Khabbazbashi 2019). Based on the analysis of the study, I argue that employing translanguaging in the classroom does not only facilitate students’ understanding of the lesson content. Translanguaging can also be used as an interactional resource for students to visualise their conceptual understanding in progress and provide valuable diagnostic information for the teacher and facilitate the evaluation of students’ current knowledge states. Such a perspective challenges the traditional perspective of SLA as L2 development has typically been assessed through using quantitative research methods, such as using pre- and post-tests, to assess L2 students’ outcomes of L2 proficiency. Reflecting the social perspective of SLA, this study reinforces that L2 development is a gradual process which requires students to employ relevant multilingual and multimodal resources in relevant situations in order to display their conceptual understanding of the L2 knowledge.

In response to the second research question regarding how the teacher makes sense of her students’ translanguaging practices in externalising their conceptual understanding, the analysis of the video-stimulated-recall-interview data demonstrates the teacher’s commitment to striking a balance between promoting English proficiency and considering the students’ learning styles, which showcases the complexity of navigating instructional decisions within the constraints of school-level expectations. In the first analysis (Table 1), T recognizes the close connection between certain vocabulary items, such as “Chinese” and “Japanese,” and the countries, people, and languages associated with them. T finds it acceptable for students to utilize their familiar language, Cantonese, to showcase their comprehension of these terms. T acknowledges the school’s language policy that emphasizes English as the medium of instruction but also recognizes the value of allowing students to use Cantonese in certain cases to facilitate their understanding. In the second analysis (Table 2), the teacher understands the benefits of multimodal translanguaging, specifically through the use of body movements, to demonstrate conceptual understanding. She acknowledges the value of active student involvement and the application of knowledge through physical actions. By recognizing and accommodating diverse learning needs, particularly kinesthetic learners, this allows the teacher to construct a translanguaging space that fosters inclusion and enables students to showcase their comprehension through engaging instructional methods. In the third analysis (Table 3), the teacher navigates the challenge of teaching emotions while wearing masks by leveraging her vocal repertoire, such as intonation and pitch. This adaptation demonstrates T’s resourcefulness in finding alternative approaches and utilizing diverse paralinguistic resources to communicate nuances. Students engage in imitating emotions, further highlighting the effectiveness of this approach in deepening their comprehension and encouraging active participation. Hence, it can be argued that the teacher’s pedagogical beliefs play an important role in creating a translanguaging space for students to engage in translanguaging practices for exhibiting their conceptual understanding of L2 knowledge.

The findings contribute to the current literature on translanguaging and SLA in several ways. Theoretically, this study has demonstrated how students’ achievement of conceptual understanding of L2 knowledge can be an embodied activity, indicating that translanguaging can work as a ‘window’ to understand the current state of an L2 student’s knowledge in the learning process. Methodologically, this study highlights the combination of multimodal CA and IPA for investigating the intricacies of students’ translanguaging practices. In particular, I have revealed that using multimodal CA allows researchers to trace students’ change of understanding of specific L2 knowledge. The findings support Tai and Khabbazbashi’s (2019) argument that multimodal CA can only provide a partial view of students’ L2 development within specific sociocultural contexts. It is important to acknowledge that students’ L2 development may not always be publicly observable during classroom interactions. This limitation is not unique to this study but is a challenge faced by SLA research in general. Fully examining the transition and progress of students’ L2 development is virtually impossible as it can take place outside the classroom and may also occur internally within learners without explicit external manifestations. This highlights the complex and multifaceted nature of L2 development (Matsumoto and Dobs 2017; Ohta 2005). Nevertheless, focusing on one specific classroom and a limited number of students can allow researchers to uncover the complexity of the classroom talk and how it contributes to students’ uptake of particular L2 knowledge.

Regarding pedagogical implications, the study has shown that L2 students can mobilise multilingual and multimodal resources to display their understanding of L2 knowledge. Students also demonstrate their ability to appropriate the teacher’s use of resources to exhibit their conceptual understanding. Hence, students’ use of translanguaging can be a possible indicator of students’ acquisition of L2 knowledge. A possible suggestion therefore is to enhance teachers’ awareness of the potential benefits of encouraging and embracing students’ translanguaging practices in the classroom. By recognizing and valuing the multilingual and multimodal resources that students bring, teachers can create a more inclusive and engaging classroom environment (Jiang et al. 2022; Tai 2023a; Tai and Li 2021). This can involve providing opportunities for students to utilize their familiar languages and modes of expression, such as body movements, gestures, or vocal variations, to demonstrate their understanding of L2 knowledge. By acknowledging translanguaging as legitimate shared repertoires within classroom communities (Wenger 1998), ESL teachers can enrich the learning experience for both local and ethnic minority students and promote a more inclusive approach to language education.