Ideologizing age in an era of superdiversity: A heritage language learner practice perspective

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aree Manosuthikit ◽  
Peter I. De Costa

AbstractSLA research on age in naturalistic contexts has examined learners’ ultimate attainment, while instructed research has emphasized the rate of learning (Birdsong 2014. Dominance and age in bilingualism. Applied Linguistics 35(4). 374–392; Muñoz 2008. Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and instructed L2 learning. Applied Linguistics 29(4). 578–596). However, both streams of research, which view age as a biological construct, have overlooked this construct through an ideological lens. To address this gap, and in keeping with Blommaert’s (2005. Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) call to examine language ideologies and related ideologies in an era of superdiversity, our paper explores the ideology undergirding age-based research and examines it in conjunction with the practice-based approach to better understand the use of Burmese as a heritage language, a language characterized by a hierarchical and an age-determined honorific system. Drawing on data from a larger ethnographic study involving Burmese migrants in the US, analyses of the bilingual practice of address forms of generation 1.5 Burmese youth demonstrated that age was relationally constructed. While these youth strategically adopted ‘traditional’ linguistic practices ratified by Burmese adults when interacting with their parents, such practices were invoked and subverted in interactions involving their siblings and other Burmese adults less familiar to them. In focusing on the social and linguistic struggles encountered by these transnational multilingual youth, this paper also addresses the complexities surrounding heritage language learning.

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 36-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Darvin ◽  
Bonny Norton

ABSTRACTThis article locates Norton's foundational work on identity and investment within the social turn of applied linguistics. It discusses its historical impetus and theoretical anchors, and it illustrates how these ideas have been taken up in recent scholarship. In response to the demands of the new world order, spurred by technology and characterized by mobility, it proposes a comprehensive model of investment, which occurs at the intersection of identity, ideology, and capital. The model recognizes that the spaces in which language acquisition and socialization take place have become increasingly deterritorialized and unbounded, and the systemic patterns of control more invisible. This calls for new questions, analyses, and theories of identity. The model addresses the needs of learners who navigate their way through online and offline contexts and perform identities that have become more fluid and complex. As such, it proposes a more comprehensive and critical examination of the relationship between identity, investment, and language learning. Drawing on two case studies of a female language learner in rural Uganda and a male language learner in urban Canada, the model illustrates how structure and agency, operating across time and space, can accord or refuse learners the power to speak.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mamluatul Hasanah

Language learning deals with the concept of language truth, language teaching, language teacher, and language context. Sociolinguistics is one of the applied linguistics which answers to the questions of language in society and also language context. Thus, sociolinguistics has great contribution on language learning especially relating with the language policy and the choise of appropriate text-book which is suitable with the social context of language learner.


2010 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. vi-vii
Author(s):  
Charlene Polio

This issue is my first edited volume of the Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (ARAL). Each year ARAL focuses on a specific theme, but about every five years it covers a range of mostly unrelated topics in a survey issue. Volume 30 was scheduled to be a survey issue, and after some discussion with the editorial directors, I decided to keep this tradition. Thus, I had the daunting task of choosing four broad topics, and then within each broad topic, a few narrow topics on which to invite scholars to write review articles. I chose a wide range of areas as a statement that I see the field of applied linguistics as not only being broad but as also representing a range of perspectives on theory and research methods. For example, I have included sections both on language socialization and on linguistic theory (mostly formal) in second language acquisition. I felt that these two areas were quite far apart with regard to the view that researchers in those areas held, but in my mind, both social and cognitive approaches to language learning and use are valid and simply seek to answer different questions. In the section on research methods, the articles focus on using both cognitive and social approaches, as well as quantitative and qualitative methods. The articles on heritage language learning focus on acquisition, policy, pedagogy, and sociocultural issues.


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoxiao Du

On-going knowledge mobilization and migration take place on a daily basis in the globalized world. Canada is a multilingual and multicultural country with a large number of visitors and immigrants. One in five Canadian speaks a foreign language other than English and French (Postmedia News, 2012). This case study examined six-year-old Chinese children’s heritage language learning in a community school from multiliteracies perspective using observations, interviews, and artefacts to understand children’s literacy learning. The findings indicated that Chinese children’s literacy learning was not in the traditional repetitive way but involved multimodal communication at school. Useful implications are made for heritage language educators regarding ways to support meaningful heritage language teaching and learning.  


2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet S. Oh ◽  
Bertha A. Nash

Research on background factors in adult language learners’ success has largely focused on first-time learners of a second language. In this study, we utilize a well-established second language learner model (the Socioeducational Model; Gardner, 1985a) to compare heritage language and second language learners in a first-semester college Spanish class. Participants (31 heritage language learners; 80 second language learners) completed a survey at the end of the semester assessing their ethnic identity, language backgrounds, attitudes and motivation toward learning Spanish. Course grades were collected as a measure of language learning success. Results indicate that heritage language learners and second language learners are similar on most background factors, but that the background factors predicting each group’s language learning success are quite different. Implications for our understanding of language learners and future research directions are discussed.


2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Carreira

What is a heritage language learner (HLL)? We argue that a pedagogically valuable answer to this question must do more than describe all individuals who ought be considered HLLs; it should also offer a roadmap for meeting the needs of HLLs with regard to language learning. To achieve this goal, which we refer to as achieving “explanatory adequacy”, the answer to the above question must 1) differentiate HLLs from second-language learners (SLLs), 2) differentiate HLLs from first-language learners (L1Ls), and 3) differentiate between different types of HLLs. In reference to the first task, we propose that HLLs are students whose identity and/or linguistic needs differ from those of second language learners by virtue of having a family background in the heritage language (HL) or culture (HC). In reference to the second task, we argue that unlike L1L-s, HLLs do not receive sufficient exposure to their language and culture to fulfill basic identity and linguistic needs. Consequently, they pursue language learning to fulfill these needs. Finally, with regard to the third task, we map out four categories of HLLs, each with different identity and linguistic needs. Along the way, we advocate for endowing all language courses where HLLs are enrolled with a focus on identity and language issues, as these relate to family background.


Author(s):  
Shizhan Yuan

This chapter compares and contrasts the curriculum, pedagogy, instructional materials, and extracurricular activities in a community-based CHL school and a Chinese-English DLI program in a southeast state of the US to discern how each is promoting Chinese immigrant children's heritage language and cultural learning. The author also explored how each school was supported by the local community. The result of this study indicates that the curriculum of the community-based CHL school was more focusing on teaching heritage culture as well as the reading and writing of Chinese words. In the Chinese-English DLI program, its cultural study curriculum in the social studies classes was more focused on the US citizenship education. However, in the social studies classes, teachers in the DLI program were able to integrate more Chinese literacy learning activities into the subject content instruction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document