Language and identity beyond the mainstream. Democratic and equity issues for and by whom, where, when and why

Abstract

Taking a point of departure in multidisciplinary research related to ethnicity, gender and functional dis/ability, this paper presents a conceptual framework where center staging languaging and identity-positionings are central. Building upon empirically framed results from ethnographical projects across timespaces, it discusses how languaging opens possibilities for discussing learning and identity-positionings that take place in and via the deployment of one or more language varieties and modalities. This is conceptually made possible by going beyond dominating, dichotomizing positions related to language, language learning methods, and the organization of language learning. The study argues that scholars inherit and live with dichotomizing positions within scholarship that in turn create specific framings for children and adults in institutions for learning.The paper discusses the case of research and the organization of language issues related to bilingualism and diversity education as specific instances of a dominating dichotomy. It illustrates how going beyond this dichotomy makes visible languaging and identity-positionings that open new ways of understanding participation and inclusion. Such a position builds upon critical humanistic thinking where sociocultural and decolonial framings are central. Going beyond the mainstream allows for new ways of conceptualizing research in the areas of language and identity where social practices are center staged. To make visible languaging thus implies that issues related to identity are focused in terms of performative processes.

Languaging in digital global South–North spaces in the twenty-first century: media, language and identity in political discourse

“…This means that languaging-irrespective of whether the communication deploys one or more language-varieties/modalities (Bagga-Gupta 1995, 2017aGynne 2016;Messina Dahlberg 2015)-is (i) collaboratively achieved, and (ii) constitutes a significant dimension of the construction of human realities; communication is not a conduit that in some neutral sense transfers knowledge or mirrors reality.…”

“…This points to the significance of a social lens and the irreducible inter-connections of people and tools. However, while the rich potentials and dimensions of communication in concert with intellectual and material tools (like paper-pencils, calculators, computers, the internet, etc., including language itself ) are recognized, attention in data analysis of social-practices in the global-North (at least) has been dominated by an "oral language bias" (Bagga-Gupta 2012, 2017a and by a "monolingual bias" (Gramling 2016). This means that complex, multilayered languaging behaviour is marginally emphasized in the study of meaning-making.…”

“…Such strategies however risk cementing ideologies. Going beyond such framings, we argue for the need to recognize decolonial perspectives in terms of a paradigm where it is the here and now in all spaces-east/south and west/north, including physical-virtual-that are worthy of empirical scrutiny (Bagga-Gupta 2017a. Such a stance implies that analytical units-of-analysis cannot be reduced to bounded entities based upon "imagined" boundaries that demarcate and create communities, nations, individuals or languagevarieties/modalities (Andersson 1994; see "Methodological framings and data" section).…”

“…However, these discussions tend to occur among European (American and Australian) scholarly networks, that do not include the rest of the world. These global-North discussions have proposed neologisms that are in themselves problematic, not least since key points of departure related to their emergence include recent waves of migration, including digitalization in global-North spaces themselves (Bagga-Gupta 2017a, b, 2018Bagga-Gupta and Dahlberg 2018). A comparative viewing of digital datasets of political parties from across GSN settings therefore is significant, and potentially allows for critically understanding how language plays out in public mediascapes.…”

“…Going beyond a narrower understanding of language and taking a performatory stance on doing language, "Communication = Languaging = Meaning-making" (Bagga-Gupta and Dahlberg 2018) irrespective of the number of language-varieties or language-modalities (oral, written, signed, etc.) participants deploy across time and physical-digital practices (Bagga-Gupta 2017a, b, c, 2014. Recognizing that languaging/discourse "is what makes human cultures possible and unique" (Keating and Alessandro 2011: 331), the present study aims to raise issues regarding mundane political "ways-of-being-with-words" (Bagga-Gupta 2014) across global-South-North (henceforth GSN) spaces.…”