Search

In this article, we address the epistemological conflict inherent in the relationship between named languages and translanguaging theory. Following with interest Turnbull's (2016) reframing of foreign language education as bilingual education and García's (2017) response, we see the logic of this reframing, but we also acknowledge García's concern that the notion of deficit lies at the heart of language learning as it is commonly conceptualized, and this deficit construct sits uncomfortably within translanguaging epistemology. In the article, we draw on Bakhtin's (1981) dialogical theory of language, Thibault's (2011) distributed language view and the theoretical construct of desire as both a lack and an energy (Ahmed 2010) to suggest that the naming of languages needs to be incorporated into translanguaging theory in a way that acknowledges the social construct of 'named languages' as integral to the expansion of one's linguistic repertoire as a whole. We make this suggestion in order to help develop translanguaging theory from a subaltern to a majority theory. We further suggest that language education can play a significant role in furthering the translanguaging project.

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is a rapidly growing area of both research and practice in all parts of the world, especially in Europe and Asia. As a young discipline, CLIL has a good potential of distinguishing itself from monolingual L2 immersion education models by becoming more flexible and balanced about the role of L1 in CLIL lessons. Although recent years have witnessed increasing research on the potential role of L1 in foreign language teaching [e.g. Littlewood, W., & Yu, B. 2009. First language and target language in the foreign language classroom. "Language Teacher," 42, 1-14], monolingual immersion ideologies are still dominant in many contexts in the world (especially in Southeast Asia) because of a whole host of ideologies. The beliefs affecting medium of instruction policies and practice have their roots in the traditional tenets (e.g. the maximum input hypothesis) in the discipline of second language acquisition (SLA). Although these tenets are increasingly being countered by recent research in multilingualism [see May, S. (Ed.). (2014). "The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education." New York: Routledge, for a critique of these tenets], SLA still has an influence on pedagogies in both immersion and CLIL programmes. In this paper, I shall first critically review these deep-rooted monolingual tenets. Then, I shall discuss how we can conceptualise the potential role of L1 in CLIL and by extension in content-based instruction (CBI), as both CLIL and immersion programmes are considered to be key approaches to CBI. I shall conclude with suggestions for future research in CLIL.

In this paper, an excerpt of teacher-student interaction in an EFL junior secondary science classroom in Hong Kong is analysed using the conversation analytic method of sequential analysis. The fine-grained analysis reveals that in the teacher's effort to engage her students in the co-construction of a scientific proof, the students' familiar everyday discourses (e.g. students' examples and experiences as expressed in their familiar language) need to be allowed to play a significant role. It also shows how translanguaging can be well-coordinated with multimodal practices (using blackboard drawings, gestures) to facilitate students' meaning-making in the inquiry-based teacher-student dialogue.

This paper proposes to overcome the traditional essentialist and dichotomous ways of conceptualising language and language pedagogies, i.e. to go beyond linguistic purist perspectives. Analysing bilingual teaching practices in a science lesson, the paper proposes that practical bilingual pedagogies can be developed to help students in bilingual education programmes to access dominant linguistic resources and discourses by capitalising on their indigenous linguistic and cultural resources.

In content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms, it is assumed that non-language content subjects provide more authentic communicative contexts for students to learn a foreign/second/additional language (L2). However, learning abstract concepts and academic language in an L2 simultaneously is also challenging for CLIL students. It is thus important for CLIL teachers to unpack and repack both abstract concepts and academic discourse for the students. 'Semantic waves', which model classroom practices of both unpacking and repacking, is arguably a key to understanding cumulative knowledge-building. Applying the concepts of semantic profiles and semantic waves, this paper analyses the classroom discourse of two CLIL science lessons in Hong Kong. In one lesson, the semantic profile mainly consists of downward shifts. The teacher adopted various useful strategies to unpack science concepts, especially with multimodalities, everyday L2 and students' L1 resources. Yet, there was limited repacking. In contrast, some repacking was observed in another lesson, where the teacher provided explicit instruction on academic language and guided students through academic writing tasks. A semantic wave can thus be observed there. These findings on strategies for unpacking and repacking provide significant insights into knowledge building in CLIL contexts, and may hence illuminate CLIL pedagogical practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we address the epistemological conflict inherent in the relationship between named languages and translanguaging theory. Following with interest Turnbull's (2016) reframing of foreign language education as bilingual education and García's (2017) response, we see the logic of this reframing, but we also acknowledge García's concern that the notion of deficit lies at the heart of language learning as it is commonly conceptualized, and this deficit construct sits uncomfortably within translanguaging epistemology. In the article, we draw on Bakhtin's (1981) dialogical theory of language, Thibault's (2011) distributed language view and the theoretical construct of desire as both a lack and an energy (Ahmed 2010) to suggest that the naming of languages needs to be incorporated into translanguaging theory in a way that acknowledges the social construct of 'named languages' as integral to the expansion of one's linguistic repertoire as a whole. We make this suggestion in order to help develop translanguaging theory from a subaltern to a majority theory. We further suggest that language education can play a significant role in furthering the translanguaging project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is a rapidly growing area of both research and practice in all parts of the world, especially in Europe and Asia. As a young discipline, CLIL has a good potential of distinguishing itself from monolingual L2 immersion education models by becoming more flexible and balanced about the role of L1 in CLIL lessons. Although recent years have witnessed increasing research on the potential role of L1 in foreign language teaching [e.g. Littlewood, W., & Yu, B. 2009. First language and target language in the foreign language classroom. Language Teacher, 42, 1–14], monolingual immersion ideologies are still dominant in many contexts in the world (especially in Southeast Asia) because of a whole host of ideologies. The beliefs affecting medium of instruction policies and practice have their roots in the traditional tenets (e.g. the maximum input hypothesis) in the discipline of second language acquisition (SLA). Although these tenets are increasingly being countered by recent research in multilingualism [see May, S. (Ed.). (2014). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education. New York: Routledge, for a critique of these tenets], SLA still has an influence on pedagogies in both immersion and CLIL programmes. In this paper, I shall first critically review these deep-rooted monolingual tenets. Then, I shall discuss how we can conceptualise the potential role of L1 in CLIL and by extension in content-based instruction (CBI), as both CLIL and immersion programmes are considered to be key approaches to CBI. I shall conclude with suggestions for future research in CLIL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper proposes to overcome the traditional essentialist and dichotomous ways of conceptualising language and language pedagogies, i.e. to go beyond linguistic purist perspectives. Analysing bilingual teaching practices in a science lesson, the paper proposes that practical bilingual pedagogies can be developed to help students in bilingual education programmes to access dominant linguistic resources and discourses by capitalising on their indigenous linguistic and cultural resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]