MULTILINGUAL COMMUNICATION

AND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION:

NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
Emil Jonathan P. Pandy
En 201
 Adrian J. Wurr

A. Suresh Canagarajah
 Outline
• I. Introduction
• II. Multilingual Communication (has 3 lengthy subparts)
• A. In Non-Western Communities
• B. English in Contact Situations
• C. Toward a Synthesis
• III. Toward a Paradigm Shift
• IV. In This Issue
• V. Conclusion
 AIM
• Outline monolingual vs multilingual orientation to language
and language acquisition
• Develop a multilingual paradigm from connections between:
• ongoing empirical studies on negotiation strategies in LF
English interactions
• theorizations of communication in nonwestern communities

• Present questions and issues that need further research

 I. Introduction
What has pushed
communities into greater
contact with each other
and compelled an
understanding of
multilingual
communication?
Globalization
 I. Introduction
We can no longer rely on traditional models of language
acquisition and competence. Why?

- These lack the capacity to explain contemporary experiences.

- We should go beyond the faulty assumptions of modern
linguistics that reflect homogeneity and monolingualism (e.g.
Chomsky); multilingualism is not new, especially in nonwestern
communities
- Rather, more complex models are needed.
II. Multilingual Communication
 II.A. Non-Western Communities
• The idealization that monolingual
communication is the norm does not exist in
many communities in the world.
• “Community” in South Asia is based on shared
space rather than shared language
(Khubchandani)
• Many language groups live in the same
geographical space.
• Diverse languages are used in everyday public
life.
• No common code is shared; what are shared
are communicative practices and strategies
What are different in these communities?
•Communicative strategies
•Norms
•Attitudes
•Language acquisition
•Language learning
 Communicative Strategies
in Non-Western Multilingual Communities

SERENDIPITY SYNERGY
norms attitudes finding a
being open
to unfamiliar common
codes ground
“coming out from their language
codes and into neutral ground”
 Communicative Strategies
(Khubchandani)
NORMS ATTITUDES “regarded as a non-
- can be deviations - autonomous device,
consensus-oriented communicating in
- co-constructed; hybrid - mutually supportive symphony with other
- context-specific non-linguistic devices;
- ecological its full significance can
- emergent grammar - be
Communication is not
- purely a cerebral or explicated only from the
e.g. Nefamese (pidgin);
rational activity. imperatives of context
Nagamese (creole) and communicative
tasks.”
 Language Acquisition
- Language learning and language use are
simultaneous.
- “all these strategies seem to show that ELF
users are competent enough to be able to
monitor each others’ moves at a high level of
awareness” (House, 2003)
 Language Learning
- Develop a range of codes for a range or
purposes
- Repertoire building rather than total
competence
 II. B. English in Contact Situations
- Speakers (LFE) adopt suitable strategies
to construct intersubjective norms that
are sufficient to achieve communicative
objectives.
 Strategies
• “let it pass” principle (renegotiating)
• Topic change, rephrasing, repetition (repairing)
• “no-man’s land” (Planken)
• reflexive comments, self-deprecating humor, evocation
of shared non-nativeness
• Segmentation and regularization (syntax) (Meierkord)
• Parallel monologues (House)
 Strategies
• Alignment is the greatest common factor; dynamic adaptation
• “Successful communication depends on aligning the linguistic
resources to the social, situational, and physical features
operative in a context” (Kramsch, 2002)
• Aligning to one’s needs and resources > competence
• “…alignment takes place not just between human beings, but
also between human beings and their social and physical
environments” (Atkinson et. al., 2007)
 II. C. Toward A Synthesis
• languages are always in contact and mutually influence each other
(Pennycook, 2010)
• codes as a continuum (Garcia, 2009)
• integrated competence
• complement each other more than at war with each other
• heteroglossic
• meaning from negotiation
• renegotiation and reconstruction due to mixing of codes
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Monolingual Multilingual
Acquisition Acquisition
- artificial situation - Language as mixed
(Chomskyan with environment;
integrated
Model) competence (Cook)
- Multitasking; parallel
processing
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Grammar Pragmatics
- competence/ - performance cannot
proficiency is more be separated from
grammar
important
-role of interactional
practices and
negotiation strategies
is more important
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Cognition Context
- - activation of ecology
Language norms are
detached from situations and
the environment
- Learning takes place
separated from a context of
multiple languages,
communicative modalities,
and environmental influences
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Individual Community
- In communication - collaboration; joint
breakdown, one production of
person alone is with meaning
fault. - All parties involved
in breakdown of
communication.
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Determinism Agency
- learners at the mercy of -
Subjects shape
grammar and discourse language to suit their
- purposes
The goal is mastery of
grammatical system. - Open to new norms
- and meanings
Deviation from norms
is incompetence. - Deviation from norms
is creative.
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Fixity Fluidity
- Language as a closed - Orchestrating
system.
-
multiple
A language is separate from
other languages, modalities, competencies
and ecological factors together
- Language acquisition is -
Possibility of
linear, cumulative, recursive language
unidirectional, and
monodimensional acquisition (Garcia)
 Understanding Binaries
Monolingual vs Multilingual Acquisition
Learner User
- Developmental and -People use diverse
languages in
not fully fledged functional ways even
users with limited contact
with or exposure to
the language.
 Understanding Binaries
Multilinguals: Nonnative VS Native
• Multilinguals do not try to mimic native speakers; not
interested in mastering native speaker forms
• Multilinguals relate all the languages in their repertoire as
part of an integrated continuum
• A “nonnative” label casts a permanent status of deficiency for
multilingual subjects
 Understanding Binaries
Multilinguals: Interlanguage vs Target Language
• Multilinguals are not moving towards someone else’s target;
they are constructing own norms
• Assumptions of interlanguage should be questioned: there
are no gradations, linear progressions, endpoints, and a
cumulative line of progression.
• Multilinguals already come with a competence that can help
handle diverse communicative situations