Minority Languages in the Netherlands: Relations between Sociopolitical Conflicts and Bilingual Education

1983 ◽  
pp. 517-526
Author(s):  
René Appel
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Minority Languages

scholarly journals Sociolinguistics

2006 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-145
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Attitudes ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
French Language ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Attitudes And Practices

06–360Blackledge, Adrian (U Birmingham, UK), The magical frontier between the dominant and the dominated: Sociolinguistics and social justice in a multilingual world. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (Multilingual Matters) 27.1 (2006), 22–41.06–361Boughton, Zoë (U Exeter, UK; [email protected]), Accent levelling and accent localisation in northern French: Comparing Nancy and Rennes. Journal of French Language Studies (Cambridge University Press) 15.3 (2005), 235–256.06–362Brown, N. Anthony (Brigham Young U, Utah, USA; [email protected]), Language and identity in Belarus.Language Policy (Springer) 4.3 (2005), 311–332.06–363Cameron, Deborah (U Oxford, UK) Language, gender, and sexuality: Current issues and new directions. Applied Linguistics (Oxford University Press) 26.4 (2005), 482–502.06–364Deutch, Yocheved (Bar-Ilan U, Israel; [email protected]), Language law in Israel. Language Policy (Springer) 4.3 (2005), 261–285.06–365Edwards, John (St Francis Xavier U, Nova Scotia, Canada), Players and power in minority-group settings. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (Multilingual Matters) 27.1 (2006), 4–21.06–366Edwards, Viv & Lynda Pritchard Newcombe (U Reading, UK), When school is not enough: New initiatives in intergenerational language transmission in Wales. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Multilingual Matters) 8.4 (2005), 298–312.06–367García, Patricia (Stanford U Graduate School of Education, USA), Parental language attitudes and practices to socialise children in a diglossic society. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Multilingual Matters) 8.4 (2005), 328–344.06–368Garner, Mark (U Aberdeen, UK), Christine Raschka & Peter Sercombe, Sociolinguistic minorities, research, and social relationships.Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (Multilingual Matters) 27.1 (2006), 61–78.06–369Goto, Yuko (U Pennsylvania, USA; [email protected]) & Masakazu Iino, Current Japanese reforms in English language education: The 2003 ‘Action Plan’. Language Policy (Springer) 4.1 (2005), 25–45.06–370Hankoni Kamwendo, Gregory (U Botswana, Botswana; [email protected]), Language planning from below: An example from northern Malawi. Language Policy (Springer) 4.2 (2005), 143–165.06–371Kaur Gill, Saran (U Kebangsaan, Malaysia, Malaysia; [email protected]), Language policy in Malaysia: Reversing direction. Language Policy (Springer) 4.3 (2005), 241–260.06–372Lantolf, James P. (Pennsylvania State U, USA; [email protected]), Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Cambridge University Press) 28.1 (2006), 67–109.06–373Määttä, Simo K. (U California, Berkeley, USA; [email protected]), The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, French language laws, and national identity. Language Policy (Springer) 4.2 (2005), 167–186.06–374Mills, Jean (U Birmingham, UK), Connecting communities: Identity, language and diaspora. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Multilingual Matters) 8.4 (2005), 253–274.06–375Pavlenko, Aneta (Temple U, USA), ‘Ask each pupil about her methods of cleaning’: Ideologies of language and gender in Americanisation instruction (1900–1924). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Multilingual Matters) 8.4 (2005), 275–297.06–376Richland, Justin B. (U California, Irvine, USA), The multiple calculi of meaning.Discourse & Society (Sage) 17.1 (2006), 65–97.06–377Silver, Rita Elaine (Nanyang Technological U, Singapore; [email protected]), The discourse of linguistic capital: Language and economic policy planning in Singapore. Language Policy (Springer) 4.1 (2005), 47–66.06–378Tannenbaum, Michal & Marina Berkovich (Tel Aviv U, Israel; [email protected]), Family relations and language maintenance: Implications for language educational policies. Language Policy (Springer) 4.3 (2005), 287–309.06–379Vaish, Viniti (Nanyang Technical U, Singapore; [email protected]), A peripherist view of English as a language of decolonization in post-colonial India. Language Policy (Springer) 4.2 (2005), 187–206.06–380Zuengler, Jane & Elizabeth R. Miller (U Winconsin-Madison, USA), Cognitive and sociocultural perspectives: Two parallel SLA worlds?TESOL Quarterly (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) 40.1 (2006), 35–58.

Bilingual Communities: U. S. National /Regional Profiles and Verbal Repertoires

1985 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 220-239
Author(s):  
Richard V. Teschner
Keyword(s):  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Federal Funding ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vantage Point ◽  
Department Of Education ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
The Past ◽  
Bilingual Communities ◽  
To Receive

From the vantage point of August 1, 1985, the past three years are better characterized by what has failed to happen, politically, in realms directly affecting the concerns of applied linguistics in the United States than by what actually has happened. Despite 55 months of the Reagan Revolution, the Department of Education is still intact, and, with it, the Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs (OBEMLA). Bilingual education continues to receive federal funding, though predictably at levels that satisfy neither its advocates (too low) nor its detractors (too high).

scholarly journals Juggling ideals and constraints

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liz Dale ◽  
Ron Oostdam ◽  
Marjolijn Verspoor
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Target Language ◽  
English Teacher ◽  
School Subjects ◽  
Shared Language ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Shared Understandings

Abstract In bilingual streams in the Netherlands, school subjects are taught in an additional language so that pupils learn both subject content and the target language by using language meaningfully. Teachers of English in bilingual streams (TEBs) are often expected to collaborate with subject teacher colleagues (STs). In addition, they teach separate language lessons. This provides TEBs with specific challenges. This article reports on a focus group (FG) study exploring the extent to which the ideals of stakeholders in bilingual schools in the Netherlands reflect the literature on this topic, using a frame of reference developed for this purpose (Dale, Oostdam, & Verspoor, 2017). Five FGs were held with TEBs and STs from Dutch schools in the network for bilingual education and with members of the network’s quality assurance panels. Each FG consisted of between three and six participants with a similar role in bilingual education; audit panel chairpersons, audit panel secretaries and STs and TEBs from different schools. Participants were asked to discuss what an ideal English teacher would do in English lessons and in cooperation with subject colleagues. Data consists of five transcripts of the FG discussions. On the basis of inductive and deductive analyses (using MaxQDA), the ideals of stakeholders are positioned in the framework to explore to what extent different types of stakeholders have complementary or conflicting views. The findings suggest that stakeholders need to develop more shared understandings and a shared language to allow TEBs to realise their ambitions.

Current research on CLIL and bilingual education in the Netherlands

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 264-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Rumlich
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Educational Policy ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Part Time ◽  
The Way

Abstract The contribution at hand provides a discussion of the six articles in this special issue on bilingual education and CLIL. It does so against the background of recent conceptual and empirical insights and the author’s perspective as an “outsider from the inside”, i.e. as a visitor to Dutch CLIL schools, a CLIL researcher and part-time teacher at a German CLIL school. The studies and resulting suggestions presented in this volume mark the way forward to a more efficient and effective CLIL practice in the Netherlands and beyond. At the same time, it becomes clear that there are still many open questions and issues to be looked into as CLIL is an intricate and challenging and endeavour for teachers, students, researchers and educational policy alike.

Het Gebruik Van Gebaren In Het Onderwijs Aan Doven

1986 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 90-99
Author(s):  
H. Knoors
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Educational Process ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Empirical Results ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Way

From a psycholinguistic point of view, asking for the reasons for using signs in the education of the deaf has become superfluous, for the answers are by now obvious. There remains however another question to be answered, a question concerning the way in which signs should be used. It is possible to use signs in the form of Signed Dutch; the signs support the spoken Dutch, consequently the order of the signs will be same as the wordorder in Dutch. Another possibility is to use Dutch Sign Language. This leads to bilingual education of deaf children. At this moment a choice between both methods is, as far as the Netherlands are concerned, merely a theoretical matter. Although there are some problems involved in combining speech with support-ing signs and although there is reason to consider the bilingual option seriously, a real choice cannot be made. We first have to wait for empirical results with respect to the use of Signed Dutch in the educational process. We also need more information about the structure of Dutch Sign Language and about the acquisition of aspects of this language. Then, i.e. in the future, a choice can be made if necessary. Meanwhile we have to realise that deaf children are in fact in a bilingual situation and that they have to acquire a sign language without appropriate models. A situation which calls for a solution.

Straattaal

1999 ◽  
Vol 62 ◽  
pp. 39-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
René Appel
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Education ◽  
Young People ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Home Language ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Large Group ◽  
Sexually Aggressive ◽  
Explorative Study ◽  
Moroccan Arabic ◽  
Youth Language

'Street language' is a kind of register, spoken by young people in Amsterdam and probably also by young people in other multi-ethnic, multilingual cities in the Netherlands. This paper reports on an explorative study of this relatively recently developed register. Street language seems to be comparable to other (monolingual) forms of youth language with respect to its function. The emergence of a mixed youth language has also been observed in other countries, for example in Sweden (Kotsinas, 1998) and Germany (Auer & Dirim, 1998). 133 students in three different schools for secondary education filled out a written questionnaire on street language. This instrument is not really appropriate for a typically spoken, informal variety, but it offered us the opportunity to collect data from a large group of respondents. The data were supplemented with information from a few informal interviews and with information from newspaper articles and television programmes on street language. 98 of the 133 students said that they used street language, boys rather more so than girls, a trend also observed in research on this subject in other countries. Especially children with Surinamese as their home language (in most cases next to Dutch) spoke street language. Students with a relatively low proficiency in Dutch (probably recently arrived) often reported that they did not speak street language. This was also the case with students who claimed to have a good proficiency in one of the following minority languages: Turkish, Moroccan-Arabic and Tamazight. Street language is (of course) most frequendy used in the streets, and also at school in informal interactions between students. Street language is used because it is funny, it is tough and because friends use it too. The respondents were also asked to give (no more than) eight examples of words or expressions in street language (with a translation in Dutch). They provided 468 words or expressions (tokens) in total. The total number of different forms (types) was 151. Most of the words and expressions came from Surinamese. Furthermore, there were words from English, and only a few words from other languages like Turkish and Moroccan-Arabic. Also some new (Dutch) words in the register of youth language were provided. Street language seems to contain quite a lot of more or less standard verbal routines. For outsiders the language sometimes seems to be (sexually) aggressive. Speakers of youth language claim that this aggressiveness is softened by the use of words and expressions from other languages.

scholarly journals Education, multilingualism and bilingualism in Botswana

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (267-268) ◽  
pp. 43-54
Author(s):  
Mompoloki Mmangaka Bagwasi
Keyword(s):  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Cultural Power

Abstract Botswana is a multilingual country. It has about 28 languages (see Anderson, Lars-Gunnar & Tore Janson. 1997. Languages in Botswana. Gaborone: Longman Botswana). Although multilingualism breeds bilingualism or vice versa, bilingualism in Botswana is not as extensive and as widespread among the 28 languages. It is mostly concentrated amongst certain groups of people and a limited number of languages. This paper interrogates the pattern of bilingualism in Botswana and the role that education plays in shaping it. Further, the paper examines the extent to which the pattern of bilingualism in Botswana fits into Liddicoat, Anthony. 1991. Bilingualism and bilingual education. NLIA Occasional Paper 2. 1–21 folk and elite bilingualism categories. The paper argues that even though bilingualism in Botswana is fostered by education, it is not elite. Most bilinguals in Botswana are speakers of minority languages who feel obliged to learn English and Setswana. There are not many speakers of English who also speak Setswana and not many speakers of Setswana who also speak the minority languages. The paper hights one of the inadequacies of multilingualism, its inability to create equality and interrelationship between languages. This paper argues that the pattern of bilingualism found in Botswana is asymmetrical and is heavily influenced by the socio-economic-cultural power relations that exist in the country. Thus, the pattern of bilingualism that is found in Botswana does not support multilingualism, instead it is detrimental to it.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document