TRANSLANGUAGING IN 15 MINUTES | Otheguy, Garcia and Reid - "Clarifying translanguaging..." (2015)
Summary
TLDRThis video script by Mike from 'The Social Life of Language' explores the distinction between 'translanguaging' and 'code switching'. It delves into the historical and political contexts that have shaped our understanding of 'named languages', often a product of colonial categorization. The script challenges the traditional perspective of language learning, advocating for translanguaging, which views language as a unified repertoire rather than separate systems. It critiques the outsider's approach to language assessment, promoting an insider's perspective that values the full linguistic potential of individuals.
Takeaways
- 📚 Translanguaging and code switching are fundamentally different concepts; the former is an insider's perspective, while the latter is an outsider's perspective.
- 🏛 The concept of 'named languages' stems from historical colonization, where linguistic systems were categorized and named by external institutions, often to subjugate and govern the colonized people.
- 🧑🏫 Code switching is viewed from an outsider's perspective, which assumes that named languages exist naturally and that language learning should be confined within these boundaries.
- 🌐 Translanguaging challenges the notion of named languages, suggesting that learners work from a unified collection of linguistic features, not separated into distinct systems.
- 🏫 In educational settings, code switching implies that teaching within the confines of a named language is the most effective and natural approach, while translanguaging encourages a more holistic view of language learning.
- 🧠 The brain does not naturally categorize linguistic features into named languages; this is a construct imposed by historical and political forces.
- 🏛️ The historical invention of named languages often has violent political histories and continues to play a significant role in governance and societal structures.
- 🔍 Translanguaging offers an insider's perspective, focusing on the learner's full linguistic repertoire without adherence to the boundaries of named languages.
- 📈 Code switching can inadvertently endorse the separation of linguistic systems, which may not align with how bilingual brains actually process language.
- 🌟 Translanguaging privileges the learner's perspective, recognizing the full range of their linguistic abilities, in contrast to code switching which may limit this by external evaluations.
- 🤔 The script prompts a rethinking of language assessment in schools, suggesting that a translanguaging approach could provide a more accurate measure of a child's linguistic and cognitive abilities.
Q & A
What is the main topic of the video script?
-The main topic of the video script is the distinction between trans languaging and code switching, as well as the concept of named languages from a linguistic perspective.
What does the term 'trans languaging' refer to?
-Trans languaging refers to the deployment of a speaker's full linguistic repertoire without strict adherence to the socially and politically defined boundaries of named languages.
What is the difference between an 'insider's perspective' and an 'outsider's perspective' in the context of the video?
-The insider's perspective, associated with trans languaging, views language from the speaker's point of view, acknowledging a unified collection of linguistic features. The outsider's perspective, linked to code switching, observes and categorizes language from an external standpoint, often imposing social criteria onto language users.
What is the origin of the concept of 'named languages'?
-The concept of named languages originates from historical processes, often involving colonization, where institutions or groups categorized and named linguistic systems to study and govern the people they were colonizing.
Why did colonizers categorize linguistic practices of the people they colonized?
-Colonizers categorized linguistic practices to subjugate and govern the people they colonized, often viewing these practices through a lens of racism, as childlike or primitive, and differentiating them from their own languages.
How does the script suggest we should rethink language assessment in schools?
-The script suggests that language assessment in schools should move away from the enforcement of named languages and instead consider the full linguistic repertoire of the learner, potentially leading to a more accurate assessment of a child's abilities and needs.
What is the script's stance on the natural existence of named languages?
-The script posits that named languages do not naturally exist but are social constructs with often violent political histories, and their divisions are not inherent to our biology or brain matter.
How does the script describe the historical role of named languages in governance?
-The script describes named languages as having played a significant role in governance, with nation-states using language as a criterion for participation and success, often tied to colonial histories and political interests.
What does the script imply about the current state of language learning and teaching?
-The script implies that current language learning and teaching practices may be limited by the enforcement of named languages, suggesting that a shift towards trans languaging could provide a more natural and effective approach.
What is the potential impact of considering trans languaging in language education?
-Considering trans languaging in language education could lead to more inclusive and effective learning experiences, as it acknowledges and values the full range of a learner's linguistic abilities rather than confining them to socially constructed categories.
How does the script connect the historical context of named languages to current language practices?
-The script connects the historical context by highlighting how the categorization and naming of languages by colonizers have influenced current language practices, including how languages are taught, learned, and assessed, often to the detriment of a more natural and comprehensive understanding of linguistic diversity.
Outlines
📚 Introduction to Trans Languaing vs. Code Switching
The video script begins with an introduction to the topic of trans languaging and code switching, emphasizing the need to differentiate between the two. It mentions a previous video on the subject and highlights the importance of understanding the distinction. The script introduces the concept of 'named languages', which are linguistic systems identified and labeled by institutions such as linguists or governments. It explains that code switching operates from an outsider's perspective, not questioning the idea of named languages, and sets the stage for a deeper exploration of the topic.
🏛 Historical Context of Named Languages
This paragraph delves into the historical context of named languages, suggesting that they were often a result of colonial efforts to categorize and control the linguistic practices of colonized peoples. It describes how colonizers would identify linguistic features, bundle them into named languages, and impose their own linguistic categories onto these groups. The paragraph also touches on the political implications of named languages in governance and education, and how they are often tied to social constructs and historical power dynamics, rather than being inherently natural or neutral.
🧠 Trans Languaing: An Insider's Perspective
The final paragraph contrasts code switching with trans languaging, which is presented as an insider's perspective. It challenges the notion that linguistic features are naturally separated into distinct systems and argues for a more unified view of language. Trans languaging is described as the use of a speaker's full linguistic repertoire without adherence to the boundaries of named languages. The paragraph criticizes the enforcement of named languages in educational settings and suggests that a trans languaging approach could lead to a more accurate assessment of a learner's abilities and needs, focusing on the individual's linguistic experience rather than external social evaluations.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Translanguaging
💡Code Switching
💡Named Languages
💡Colonizing Institutions
💡Linguistic Features
💡Insider's Perspective
💡Outsider's Perspective
💡Language Competence
💡Social Construct
💡Linguistic Repertoire
💡Mental Capacity
Highlights
Translanguaging and code switching are not the same, representing different perspectives on language use.
Translanguaging is an insider's perspective, while code switching is viewed from an outsider's perspective.
Code switching does not question the concept of named languages, which are systems named by institutions or governments.
Named languages often have violent, political histories and remain important to governance.
Colonizers and institutions historically invented or discovered linguistic systems to categorize and subjugate people.
The concept of named languages is a social construct, not a mental or psychological one.
Code switching assumes that named languages exist naturally and are a good starting point for language learning.
Translanguaging challenges the idea that linguistic features are naturally separated into named languages.
Translanguaging posits that learners work from a unified collection of linguistic features, not divided into systems.
Language teaching often enforces the split between named languages, which is not natural but a historical political invention.
Translanguaging is the deployment of a speaker's full linguistic repertoire without adherence to named language boundaries.
Translanguaging privileges the learner's perspective, focusing on what is inside the learner's head.
Code switching privileges social evaluations from the outside, enforcing named language divisions.
Language assessment in schools often suppresses linguistic features that do not fit into the named language being tested.
Translanguaging could allow for a more accurate assessment of a child's linguistic abilities and needs.
The video emphasizes the importance of understanding the difference between code switching and translanguaging for language education.
Transcripts
welcome back word nerds mike here with
the social life of language making
complex theories simple but never
simplified if you think that sounds cool
hit that subscribe button
now today we'll be covering the article
clarifying trans languaging
and deconstructing named languages a
perspective
from linguistics by othegy garcia and
reed before we start full disclosure a
couple years ago ophelia requested that
i make a video on trans languaging which
i did
and i strongly recommend that after this
video you go back
and watch that one too i'll put the link
up in the corner now
ortegi ended up seeing this video and he
told me
mike you gotta make it really clear that
trans languaging and code switching
are not the same so in this video we
approach
this question again what's the
difference between trans languaging
and code switching let's find out
first a clear statement trans languaging
does not equal code switching imagine
trans languaging and code switching
are two perspectives standing on the
opposite side
of a mountain what can be seen what's
going to be observed is
totally different in this article the
authors use this idea of
perspective trans languaging is an
insider's perspective
while code switching is an outsider's
perspective i want to start on familiar
territory
let's clarify code switching and the
outsider's perspective
first this takes us to a major keyword
in the title of this
article named languages what is that
it refers to linguistic systems that
have been named by various
institutions or group of institutions
for example
a group of linguists or a state
government
names like english or spanish or
whatever
code switching does not question the
idea of a named
language let's ask some questions first
how does a language get a name
let me tell you a true but generalized
story to begin we might perceive
a linguistic feature feature 1 f1
and then also feature 2 f2 and
f3 and f4 we might make the claim that
this
cluster of features that we just
perceived
are used by this particular group of
people
we then draw a box around these
linguistic
features and then we say this group of
features constitute what we call
a language a language named english or
spanish
or whatever let's ask a bigger question
what reason did we have at some point
in history to describe to list words
to create grammar books and then give a
name to those linguistic features
those linguistic features that were
spoken by some group
we can't just pretend like we didn't
have a reason to do it in the first
place
let's build on our story if we look at
history and the emergence of named
languages
we are talking about colonizing
institutions who had an
interest in studying the people they
were colonizing
usually to subjugate and govern them
this might require they go in and they
study their linguistic practice
and since colonizers have a dependably
racist view
of the people they colonized they would
study and categorize their linguistic
practice
as childlike as primitive so if this is
obviously not english then we should
give this
another name so they get their own
linguistic category their own
name their own box to be more blunt
these colonizers these outsiders brought
with them
a very specific set of assumptions of
what
constitutes a language and essentially
forced other people's linguistic
practices
into those boxes into that set of
assumptions that they brought
with them from the outside for example
if a certain number of linguistic
features
were observed across a certain number of
people
suddenly we start seeing linguistic
patterns
suddenly we start assuming there is a
stable linguistic system
this set of assumptions about language
is from an outsider's perspective
literally in essence colonizers would
not simply
discover a group of people or discover
some land
they would also discover new linguistic
systems much in the same way christopher
columbus
discovered america
from a different perspective we can also
say
that he along with historiographers
along with map makers along with
soldiers
along with the nation state that
financed all of these adventures
together they invented america now
mapping was an important part of the
colonial enterprise
those maps were made from the outsiders
perspective
not from for example the colonized
people's
perspective who probably had a totally
different way of perceiving the land
so importantly these maps are made from
an outsider's perspective
not from for example the colonized
people's perspective
in the same way we can think of the
discovery of linguistic
systems as mapping linguistic features
from an outsider's perspective an
outsider that says
oh these are the important parts these
are the less important parts
these are the important patterns this
makes up the grammar this makes
up the system this is a linguistic
system that needs
a name on top of that the colonizers
might say
something like hey you can participate
in your own colonial governance
but using our ideas of what a language
is
and we already mapped out your language
and it's not
modern enough to participate in
governance here's the thing
named languages do not just
exist they often have violent
political histories named languages
remain very important to governance
to this day when you get right down to
it we're
a nation that speaks english that's how
they will become
successful and do great so i think it's
more appropriate to be speaking english
so when we talk about named languages we
almost
always forget the postulate that a named
language
is a social construct not a mental
or psychological one we are standing
outside of the speaker's head
observing categorizing listing
documenting measuring observations that
depending on who
is doing the observing will notice
certain things
but not other things we'll say that's
important that's not important
this has value this other stuff does not
have value for example if you are a
school leader in charge of
assessing language competence you will
likely be using
tools developed by the nation state
you are using very specific criteria and
you're assuming that those name
languages have always just
existed and that there is some neutral
way to measure this thing we call
language competence this is what is
crucial here when we talk about
code switching we are observing from an
outsider's perspective
while also imposing a very specific
social criteria onto language users
that were developed throughout history
notice that up to this point
we have not talked about the speaker's
perspective
at all so let's pause right here and
let's overview what we've said
so far when we are talking about code
switching between
named languages we are assuming quite a
few things
first we assume that named languages
exist
in nature we forget about all the
historical processes that actually
helped
invent those named languages we forget
that
somewhere along the way there was a
group of people or an institution or a
nation-state
that had a political interest in
inventing or discovering linguistic
systems
and the next assumption follows from the
first
we believe that sorting out linguistic
features into named languages
is a good starting point for language
learners
so then what follows from there is we
start attaching
value to certain linguistic features and
not
others we say this language is good in
school
that is not this language is good for a
job interview
that is not this language is appropriate
here
but it's not there so when we talk about
code switching no matter
how positive we spin the idea the
authors say
the notion of code switching still
constitutes a theoretical endorsement
of the idea that what the bilingual
manipulates
however masterfully are two separate
linguistic
systems two separate named systems
but remember we named those systems
after the fact
yet we try to teach language learners as
if our language learning brain
naturally accepts those divisions
between linguistic systems
because supposedly that's just the way
language works
so that must mean our brain works like
that
too but trans languaging is like
nah so here's why we can't say code
switching and trans languaging are the
same trans languaging posits that
learners work from a unified collection
of linguistic features
not naturally separated into systems
into named languages again let's be
clear code switching assumes that our
brain
naturally sorts out these linguistic
features
naturally puts them into boxes but
everything that we've been talking about
thus far
reveals that those boxes are not natural
but historical political inventions
recent ones at that in terms of language
teaching
the idea of code switching assumes that
teaching within the parameters of a
named language
is probably the best way to teach
language learners
but also the natural way to teach
language learners
trans languaging is challenging us to
adopt a perspective
from inside the learner's head the
insider's perspective
that split between named languages is
not
built into our biology it's not built
into our brain matter but we
enforce that split every single
day from outside of the learner's head
especially in schools
[Music]
military men and women fighting are not
fighting for your right to speak spanish
they're fighting for your right to speak
american
for example in the united states english
spanish bilingual children
were constantly categorized as mentally
because surprise the tests that
were used to measure something called
mental capacity
rejected a giant chunk of a person's
linguistic features
of a person's linguistic abilities put
another way
those linguistic features just simply
didn't count
on that test it's the same reason black
children were also categorized as
mentally
because they weren't speaking the
language named english they were
speaking something else
they were speaking a language named
african-american english
and those linguistic features do not
count
on the test let me ask you a serious
question
has that kind of language assessment in
schools
really changed the authors say trans
languaging
is the deployment of a speaker's full
linguistic repertoire without regard for
watchful adherence
to the socially and politically defined
boundaries
of named and usually nation-state
languages
for example a child growing up in a
household that speaks the languages
named
english and spanish is usually not
learning to talk
under social political constraints but
as soon as a child
steps into a school we immediately start
restricting
some linguistic features while valuing
other linguistic features
those restrictions those evaluations
come
from the outside they are not part of
natural psychological mental processes
so what if we thought about language
differently without the rigorous
enforcement of named languages
without attempting to measure what a
child knows
while simultaneously suppressing all the
linguistic features that are in
the wrong named language wouldn't we
actually be able to tell how brilliant a
child is
wouldn't we be able to assess even
better where a child
actually needs help to succeed so trans
languaging
privileges the learner privileges what
is going on
inside the learner's head code switching
privileges
social evaluations from the outside
from the outsiders perspective okay this
stuff is really complicated but you
might
feel the difference now but i spent most
of today's video
clarifying the assumptions underneath
code switching if i clarified
anything here i'm hoping that i
clarified that code switching and trans
languaging
are not the same thing this is where you
go watch my other video
on trans languaging there i focus on
trans languaging much more well that's
all for today folks don't forget to like
and subscribe and follow me on twitter
and go
support this channel on patreon you can
also download my publications off of
academia.edu this is mike with the
social life of language
and we're done
you
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)