Translanguaging as safeguard for minority ways of speaking

1. Translanguaging as safeguard for minority ways of speaking János Imre Heltai (heltai.janos@kre.hu) Károli Gáspár University of theReformedChurchin Hungary Multilingual Theories and Practices(MTP19) Ionian University, Kerkyra – Corfu 9-10 May 2019

2. Outline • Somereactionstothegrowingcriticism of translanguagingregardingits • descriptiveappropriateness (Auer 2019) • transformativepower (Jaspers 2018) • consequencesforminoritylanguagepolicies (Cenoz and Gorter 2017) • Basedon • empiricaldataof translanguagingpracticesof Roma • experiencesin a „translanguagedschool” in Hungary

3. Translanguaging as a polysemicterm • Linguisticpractices • TL is goingboth„betweendifferent linguistic structures and systems and going beyond them” (Li 2011: 1223) • „Bilinguals, multilinguals, and indeed,all users of language, select and deploy particular features from a unitary linguisticrepertoire” (Vogel–Garcia 2017: 2) • An educationalorientation • withtransformativepowerand a qualitytoincreasesocialequality (Poza 2017) • guided TL as a concept of learningorganisation(Cenoz–Gorter 2017) • A theoreticalapproach • a basicmetaphor of criticalsociolinguisticstodescribe human communication (Li 2018)

4. Recent critiqueon TL • Parallel totheextensiveimplications of theconcept of TL, considerations and critiquesemergeatleastwisethreelevels • Auer (2019) discreditsthepowerof theterm: he suggeststhat it describestoomanydifferentlinguisticpractices and it is a stepbackwardfromoutcomes of code shifting theories • Jasperswarns of theemptyingof theterm, questionsthetransformativepower of theconcepttofightinequality (2018) and suggeststoseeits’ effect in an interplaywithotherfactors, hence education is an open and dynamicsystem (2019) • Cenozand Gorter (2017) warn against neglecting earlier results of minority language policy while preferring translanguaging • Mycontributionstothesediscussionsarebasedonexperiencesfrom a project fullyinspiredby translanguaging theory

5. TL in Tiszavasvári • Ethnographicfieldwork (100 dayssince2016)in a Roma community (3,000 people) in Tiszavasvári (12,000 people), Hungary • interviews (30 Hours), lessonobservations (<80), participatingobservations • Roma speakers in TiszavasváriareRomani-Hungarianbilingual. Theirways of speaking linked to Romani • arenon-standard and notaffectedby the efforts tostandardise Romani in Hungary • includeresourceswhichareevaluatedindifferentways: • inacademicdiscoursesasdifferentoutcomes of languagecontact (loanwords, code mixing). • byHungarian-speakingmonolingualteachersasHungarianresourcesin a mixed language • byRoma studentsas Romani

6. „Translanguagedschool” • Spontaneousand guided translanguaging • Introducingtranslanguaging orientationinto everyday schoolpractice (Heltai 2019) tosupportstudentsschoolsuccess • Monthlyworkshopsbasedonlessonsheld and/orvisitedbyparticipatingeducators, researchersandstudents • withvoluntaryparticipation • Acquiringtechniques of learningorganisation • Discussingconsequences and difficulties

7. 1. Auer: TL is „losingsight of distinction” As a resultof severingmentalfacts(repertoires) fromsociallyconstructedfacts (languages) „disconnected phenomena of language contact and highly diverse bilingual practices are all subsumed under the new term, losing sight of the complex and much more differentiated distinctions that have been established on empirical grounds over decades of bilingual studies” (Auer 2019: 16) • Following Auer’s suggestion, Translanguaging in Tiszavasvári is alsodescribableas a setof dualismsarrangedaccordingtothepatterns of fractalrecursivity (Irvine and Gal 2000): Hungarianand Romani, „realRomani” and local Romani withcode mixing; alternational mixing and insertional mixing etc. • Descriptionslikethisoverlooktherhysomatic (Pietikäinen 2015) nature of translanguaging:„in order to designate something exactly, anexactexpressionsare utterly unavoidable. (…)We employ a dualism of models only in order toarrive at a process that challenges all models. Each time, mentalcorrectives are necessary to undo the dualisms we had no wish toconstruct but through which we pass. Arrive at the magic formula weallseek-PLURALISM = MONISM(Deleuze and Guattari 1987 [1978]: 20) • Translanguaging theorycontentratesnotonthecodesbuthelpstofocusonthespeakers

8. 2. Jaspers: TL is less transformativethansuggested The main reasons for this are 2.1. thattranslanguaging scholars share anumber of convictions with the monolingual authorities they criticize 2.2. that their transformative claims trade on causalityeffects that cannot be taken for granted 2.3. and that translanguaging, at least in some of its representations, is becoming adominating rather than a liberating force.” (Jaspers 2018: 2)

9. 2.1. TL-scholars share anumber of convictions with the monolingual authorities they criticize Both sides„reducequestions ofschool success and social inequality to a linguistic quintessence” and are„convinced that a discourse of discipline is conducive to making teachers implement thepreferredbehaviour” (Jaspers2018: 5) • In Tiszavasvári, • participantslookat TL asthe starting point: a baseforpedagogicalinnovations • researchers and teachersworktogetherinworkshopstodealwithdifficulties

10. 2.2. „their transformative claims trade on causalityeffects that cannot be taken for granted” • Effectsof improvinglearningskillsareproblematictomeasure, (but…) • more well-being and anxiety-freepresenceof students (resultingin more behaviourproblemsinteachers’ perception) • Growingrole of activitiesbasedonstudent-studentcommunication • Ideologiesand hierarchies of participantsareaffectedbyTranslanguaging Interviewwitheducatorsatschool, March 2019 (e1 = firstgradeteacher e2 = uppergradeteacher) e1: It is a greatimprovementmainlyforus, notforthestudents. (e2: forus, forus, forus). And wecanreturnit back tothechildren. (e2: yes, yes) thatweplaceourselvesintheirposition, and whatwelearn-webegintounderstandthestudents-thewayshoweducation- no, noteducation, buthowknowledgebuildsupthroughwhattheyaretryingtoteachus and wearetryingtolearn. Wedonotunderstandinthewayweshould, donotunderstandwell, weacceptit, giveittothem, takeit back, sowegetusedtoeachotherwiththestudents. And this is a veryinterestingprocess, that has nothappenedso far tous. Wehavenottaughtinthiswayyet.

11. 2.3. TL „is becoming adominating rather than a liberating force” „This is most visible inthe way that concerns with minority language maintenance are approached” (Jaspers 2018: 7).

12. 3. Translanguaging weakensminoritylanguagepolicies (Cenoz and Gorter 2017) ”The potential problems associated with translanguaging in situations with regional minoritylanguages come from the imbalance in status and power between the languages.” (…) ”Regionalminority languages are vulnerable and their situation isdynamic.(…) Many minority languages are still in the process of standardisation and there is a weak traditionof them being used in academic contexts.”(Cenoz and Gorter 2017: 908) In Tiszavasvári, translanguaging can be alsoseenas an alternativetostandardisation: • nonstandardlanguagepractices • prevouslynot part of the language of instruction at school • dominant in the repertoire of the students. Underthesecirumstances, learningorganisationbasedonguided translanguaging and embracingspontaneous translanguaging unitsdoesnotweakentheminoritylanguage (languaging)

13. Thankyouforyourattention! (heltai.janos@kre.hu)

14. References: • Auer, Peter 2019. ‘Translanguaging’ or ‘doinglanguages’? Multilingualpractices and thenotion of ‘codes. Availablefromresearchgate.net. Author’s copy, pre-reviewing version. Writtenfor: J. MacSwanned., Language(s): Multilingualism and ItsConsequences, MultilingualMatters, Series ‘Language, Education and Diversity. • Jaspers, Jürgen 2018. The transformativelimits of translanguaging. Language and Communication 58. 1-10. • Cenoz, Jasone, DurkGorter 2017. Minority languages and sustainable translanguaging: threat or opportunity? Journal of MultilingualandMulticultural Development 38(10). 901–912. • Deleuze, Gilles, Felix Guattari 1987. A ThousandPlateaus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. • García, Ofelia, Tatyana Kleyn. 2016. Translanguaging with multilingual students: Learning from classroom moments. New York: Routledge. • Heltai, JánosImre 2019. Translanguaging instead of standardisation: Writing Romani at school. Applied Linguistics Review. Ahead of print. • Irvine, Judith, GalSusan 2000. Languageideology and linguisticdifferentiation. In Paul V. Kroskrity(ed.) Regimes of Language. School of American Research Press. 35-83. • Jaspers, Jürgen 2019. Authority and moralityinadvocatingheteroglossia. Language, Culture and Society 1. 83-105. • Li Wei 2011. Moment analysis and translanguaging space: Discoursive construction of identities by multilingual Chinese youth in Britain. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5). 1222-1235. • Li Wei 2018. Translanguaging as a practical theory of language. Applied Linguistics 39. 9–30. • Pietikäinen, Sari 2015. Multilingual dynamics in Sámiland: Rhizomatic discourses on changing language . International Journal of Bilingualism 19(2). 206-225. • Poza, Luis 2017. Translanguaging: Definitions, implications, and further neeeds in burgeoning inquiry. Berkeley Review of Education 6(2). 101-128. • Vogel, Sarah – García Ofelia 2017. Translanguaging. In: Noblit, George W. (ed.) Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press. Oxford. • Williams, Cen. 1994. Arfarniad o DdulliauDysgu ac AddysguyngNghyd-destunAddysgUwchraddDdwyieithog [An evaluation of teaching and learning methods in the context of bilingual secondary education]. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Bangor: University of Wales.

15. Consequences and difficulties • Growingrole of group-basedactivitiesbasedonstudent-studentcommunication • Anxiety-freepresence of students (resultingin more behaviorproblemsinteachers’ perception) • the reasons for the poor performance of previously silent and under-achieving students become transparent • Growinguncertainty of educatorsbyloosingcontrolaboutsomepartsofthelearningprocess