Volume 8, Issue 2 - Special Issue: Capitalizing on linguistic diversity in education / Guest editors: Adelheid Hu and Ingrid de Saint-Georges

As children’s agency in influencing institutional language practices is often not carefully reflected in early childhood education curricula, the objective of this paper is to offer meaningful insights about how institutional language policies are both reproduced and transformed by children’s everyday use of language. For this purpose, we will combine conceptual resources from social theory, sociolinguistics and childhood studies in order to analyse children’s linguistic behaviour by applying a structure-agency perspective as a relational approach. Drawing on data from ethnographic field research within institutional day care centres in Luxembourg, our findings demonstrate that the status of children as actors in institutional language practices is strongly connected to institutional policies as a structural condition. However, this does not mean that children just enact these language policies, because they are actors of both maintaining, undermining and alternating them. In this respect, especially the translanguaging of children and caregivers plays a crucial role in the Luxembourgish context as it allows to build a bridge between the official institutional language policy and the individual linguistic repertoires. Considering the goal of establishing a plurilingual environment in early childhood education which now is paramount to the educational language policy of the Luxembourgish government, this article suggests that translanguaging practices should be considered as one of the key starting points to create a plurilingual ecology in and through everyday practice in the day care centres.

Numerous scholars have investigated translanguaging in students with a migration background by examining the deployment of their linguistic repertoire. By contrast, few studies have adopted a social semiotic perspective on translanguaging. Similarly, studies on newcomers in this field are scarce. Newcomers, especially those to the trilingual education system in Luxembourg, face significant language challenges. The present paper explores the ways in which Portuguese-speaking Harry combined the resources of his semiotic repertoire in science and French lessons in Year 4, and discusses different combinations of resources. Findings based on field notes and video-recordings of classroom activities show that the eleven-year-old engaged in learning by activating his prior knowledge and deploying his semiotic repertoire in resourceful ways. He mobilised features of five languages, coordinated linguistic, paralinguistic and extralinguistic resources, and aligned his resources to those of his peers. Furthermore, he reproduced the semiotic combinations of peers as well as the translanguaging practices in class. We show that a newcomer orchestrates his semiotic resources in complex ways to communicate, make meaning and engage in learning processes. Further research into the deployment of the semiotic repertoire at school is needed.

The present article approaches the subject of oral formulation practices in multilingual and conversational writing interactions. Within the framework of pluriliteracy in the context of foreign language practice at university, special emphasis is placed on the manifestations of linguistic repairs as a mechanism, integrated in sequences of interactive formulation. By analyzing extracts of an interaction between three students according to the method of conversation analysis (CA), linguistic and interactional particulars of these repairs are identified, allowing for a first typology of formulation procedures with embedded repair operation.A second aim is to demonstrate in what way different languages are being used during the formulation process. By doing so, the question of how students draw on their plurilingual resources is discussed. The overall issue is addressed through a theoretical framework of functional language distribution in conversational writing.

In recent decades, scholars have documented how globalisation and mobility have changed our relationship with linguistic, social and cultural norms. Yet in most educational contexts, evaluation systems still tend to support the teaching of homogeneous knowledge mastered by all, and to portray linguistic standards as key for social mobility. Drawing on qualitative interviews conducted with students on an international and multilingual higher education programme, this paper examines what the students claim they learn from a programme premised instead on the circulation of a multiplicity of norms, standards and practices. The interviews, conducted on the basis of a co-inquiry approach, suggest that the students learn to 1) deal productively and agentively with tensions, 2) rethink their positions and 3) open up to unexpected experiences when teachers support them in navigating multiple norms. In conclusion, the paper highlights how the research elucidates two kinds of norms at play in the programme, institutional and lived norms, and the relationship between them. It also reflects on the utility of discussing multilayered norms (Canagarajah 2006) openly in a globalised higher education context.

Despite the growing linguistic and cultural diversity in higher education and research, little is known about how students and researchers use their plurilingual repertoire for writing and publishing. In particular, the roles of the national language(s) and the linguistic repertoire(s) vis-à-vis English as the lingua franca for academic writing and publishing have not been closely examined. This paper explores how doctoral researchers in Luxembourg position themselves in relation to macro-level discourses about language and academic success within their complex lingua-cultural and socio-economic setting. By analysing interview transcripts of two multilingual doctoral researchers from Russia and Germany, I show how in spite of their similar starting situations they negotiate agency to varying degrees. In particular, the prevalence of English and the pressure to publish in international journals seem to make them struggle to use their full linguistic repertoire in writing their theses.

The study examines whether already knowing several languages and feeling proficient in a new foreign language (FL) has an effect on positive and negative emotions during the learning. The emergence of positive psychology in language acquisition studies has led to the examination of positive emotions in the FL learning process, such as Foreign Language Enjoyment (FLE). FLE is a positive emotional state where psychological needs are met and was introduced as the positive emotion counterpart to the oft studied negative emotion, Foreign Language Anxiety (FLA). A international sample of 1622 FL learners were analysed utilising multivariate tests of variance, examining the level of multilingualism and the level of self-perceived FL proficiency as independent variables, with FLE and FLA as dependent variables. Results indicated a very small, but statistically significant interaction effect between the level of multilingualism and self-perceived FL proficiency on the FLA of the language learner, but not on FLE. In addition, higher levels of multilingualism were associated with higher levels of enjoyment and lower levels of anxiety in FL learners. In turn, more self-perceived proficient FL learners indicated higher levels of enjoyment and lower levels of anxiety. Although effect sizes were in some cases very small, the results do indicate the benefits multilinguals and higher proficiency FL learners have when learning a FL.

This paper seeks to show how language, combined with other social variables, exacerbates migrants’ and their descendants’ struggles at school and beyond in Luxembourg. To a certain extent, the official trilingualism of Luxembourg – French, German and Luxembourgish – corresponds to an ‘elite multilingualism’ (Garrido 2017; Barakos and Selleck 2018) which defines who can access certain resources, e. g. education, work etc., and who can be left playing catch-up. The latter are those migrants who I here conceive as multilinguals on the margins . The elitist system is a form of domination and power over those whose language repertoire is less valued. Migrants’ disadvantage is further impacted by other indicators of their identity that can go beyond their educational qualifications and language repertoire per se , such as their country of origin, ethnicity, race, gender, citizenship etc. Language intersects with other forms of disadvantage or privileges. From an ethnographic sociolinguistic perspective, drawing on interviews and participant observations, this paper will illustrate this intersection of language, race and ethnicity, and struggles from the ground-level educational realities and aspirations of Cape Verdean migrants and their descendants in Luxembourg. This helps cast light on the social organisation in Luxembourg and understand the effects of multilingualism in creating ‘abyssal lines’ (Santos 2007) between the nationals, certain European migrants, Lusophone and African migrants in terms of social and economic mobility.

The present study explores the case of a transnational Polish family in Norway in which one of the care givers as well as the teenage son underwent a name change after their initial experiences of migration. Drawing on the audio-recorded interactions in the interview situation, the article investigates the identity constructions of the focal participant in his narrative about the name change. To this end, first, the indexicalities of the social identity category Pole as constructed in Norwegian media and the participants’ accounts are outlined. Then, against this backdrop, the focal participant’s identity claims as occasioned in the narrative on the name change are discursively analyzed. The analysis shows that the identity claims the focal participant makes aim at dissociating himself from the powerless, stigmatized position of a migrant, in which he was cast upon his arrival in Norway. Furthermore, the study suggests that migrant identity constructions need to be considered against the participants’ lived experiences of migration, larger societal discourses and against participants’ constructions of belonging to imagined communities.