There’s regularly talk of ‘correct’ or ‘standard’ English in the media and on Twitter. Some people apparently wear their bad grammar like a badge of honour or refuse to learn the ‘correct’ way of speaking because, the critics say, it makes them look cooler or ‘down with the kids’. And don’t even ask about glottal stops! In the second part of our discussion, Ian Cushing and I look at what ‘standard English’ is, and why we should question policies that insist upon it being spoken in full sentences, at all times. Why does grammar get people heckling each other and cause headline news?
Let’s talk about talking!
Following on from part one of our discussion about grammar, Ian and I talk about the idea of what ‘correct’ language is in more detail. Where does this idea that a language has a standard form come from? Why do some hold it up as the only ‘proper’ way to communicate in some classrooms?
If a student has their hand up to contribute to a discussion in class, do you:
A) insist they speak in full sentences with no fillers or conversational markers; or B) welcome their intellectual contribution to the discussion?
To what extent should we ‘police’ students’ spoken language, and encourage them to use ‘better’ English when speaking? This is a really hot topic, and has sparked lots of interesting debate recently. Ian explains that YES, of course it is important that students know and can use standard English. But it is equally important that they know *about* standard English. This is because it comes with several layers of political, social and personal oppression and has a chequered history.
What is ‘standard’ English?
The standard form of any language is a social construction, invented by powerful social groups who continue to perpetuate and promote it. It protects their interests to do so. The standard form of a language becomes a gatekeeper for access to education and employment, for example. It is definitely worth investigating the history of what we mean by ‘standard’ English, since it is bound up with notions of race and class. The standard language ideology gets upheld quite often in schools because we see lots of real-life effects of the ‘standard/non-standard’ ideology.
Ian explains how non-standard varieties can get constructed as ‘deviant or non-compliant’ or even ‘subordinate’. This leads to a hierarchy of ways of using language. The whole notion of stratified (‘better’ or ‘worse’) language is problematic as we explored in part 1. See also my conversation about accents with David and Ben Crystal here, and Michael Rosen’s question about who ‘owns’ language here.
Should we teach it, then?
The debate on social media quite often centres on whether linguists are encouraging teachers to shirk teaching standard English, when it is our duty to teach the curriculum. Teachers also seek to provide our students with the ‘best possible’ education to prepare them for their future work and further education. Sometimes it seems linguists are at odds with this when arguing against the blanket ‘standard English at all times’ policies. The debate can get quite heated! In this podcast we delve into this issue of ‘social justice’ in more detail. Let’s look at how linguists and teachers can work together to provide the best possible education for students. Linguists are not trying to stop teachers from teaching standard English. Far from it!
We really do need much more joined-up thinking in terms of language study from primary through to higher education.
Ian points teachers to several useful resources including the work of Julia Snell at the University of Leeds (language and social class, and performing different identities through language); Rob Drummond at Manchester Met University (identity, youth language and non-standard grammar); and Marcello Giovanelli at Aston University (language study in schools). There is brilliant work and support available at the English and Media Centre too. And in the US, Ian mentions work on standard language and race in schools such as the work of April Baker-Bell, Nelson Flores, Mariana Souto-Manning and Jonathan Rosa. Plenty of further reading for you to enjoy!
Listen below, or click on the buttons above, and on iTunes, Google, Amazon, Spotify etc. And do join the conversation about language on Twitter. Should we encourage our students to develop diverse linguistic repertoires and discuss attitudes to language in class? Students, how do you feel about teachers correcting the way you speak in school? Find us on @langrevolution and @ian_cushing. Let’s talk about talking!
There’s regularly talk of ‘correct’ or ‘standard’ language in the media and on Twitter. Some people apparently wear their bad grammar like a badge of honour or refuse to learn the ‘correct’ way of speaking because, the critics say, it makes them look cooler or ‘down with the kids’. And don’t even ask about glottal stops! In the second part of our discussion, Ian Cushing and I look at what ‘standard English’ is, and why we should question policies that insist upon it being spoken (in full sentences) at all times. And why does grammar get people heckling each other? Read the blog on www.thelanguagerevolution.co.uk to find the links mentioned.
Let’s talk about the G-word: grammar. It’s a bit of a Marmite subject. People seem to love it or hate it, and for some it is a trigger word. When I mention that I like linguistics, people can get a bit defensive and ask if I’m going to correct their apostrophes. There is, it seems to me, a conflation of linguistics with the ‘naming of parts’ and subjects, verbs and objects. Grammar can be a real bone of contention in education too, and even cause ripples in politics.
To untangle the issue of grammar teaching in school, I spoke to Dr Ian Cushing from Brunel University in London, where he is a Lecturer in Education, previously Teaching Fellow in English Linguistics at UCL and leads the English PGCE programme. He has research interests concerning language policy in schools, grammar in schools and teachers’ knowledge about language.
Let’s talk about talking!
Grammar teaching – where are we now?
When I was at school in the 80s and 90s, we didn’t really learn explicitly about grammatical terms in our English lessons. I’ve heard from other people my age that they ‘discovered’ that verbs were a thing in English once they started learning French or other foreign languages at school. And yet, grammar is now a significant part of teaching in primary schools. How do teachers feel about this? Are we feeling confident and qualified?
Before we dive in too far, Ian asks us to question what we mean when we use the word ‘grammar’, since we can define it in different ways. Do we mean the study of ‘clause level’ grammar, such as identifying parts of speech? Or are we talking about ‘discourse level’ grammar, and how linguistic patterns contribute and shape meaning? And then there are the ideologies about grammar, and the differences between spoken and written codes. It is a big subject, so we begin with some contextualising of what we mean when we say ‘grammar’ and how the cycle of grammar teaching has returned to quite a prescriptive approach.
Teacher knowledge about grammar
Rather than discussing ‘knowledge about grammar’, Ian suggests we use the phrase ‘knowledge about language’ or language awareness. There can be quite a lot of pressure on teachers to get their pupils through the SATS at the end of primary school. Pedagogies can often (not always!) be written in response to the spelling, punctuation and grammar elements of these tests. In secondary school, teachers have a little more freedom to move beyond the prescriptive approach of clause level grammar. We can investigate ‘discourse level’ approaches to language, looking at meaning, contexts, patterns and language choices. Below A Level English Language, however, there could be more space in the curriculum for talking about attitudes, linguistic variation, accents, dialects, history of language, language change, ideologies, and standardised/non-standardised Englishes. It’s all really helpful to get pupils interested in language, and the way we use it. Teachers could be supported to develop a more critical, political and sensitive approach to language teaching. Connecting linguists and teachers could be a good way forward for this kind of collaboration.
Different theories and frameworks for talking about grammar and language all come with different metalanguage (language about language). It’s not surprising that teachers can sometimes feel overwhelmed when googling a grammatical term, as different approaches explain the same things in different ways. We might clutch at the ‘rules’ because they seem solid, when in fact language is more diaphanous and vague. What we do have, however, are conventions about how we use language in different contexts and for different purposes. Thinking about grammar conventions is a bit more helpful in terms of avoiding the ‘right/wrong’ approach of talking about language.
Language is a bit messy, and doesn’t always conform to these so-called invented rules.
Ian Cushing on grammar ‘rules’
As Michael Rosen said in episode 10, language is always ‘language in use’. Talking about grammar in a very abstract way suggests that it conforms to a set of rules, but it is much messier than that. There are conventions and patterns which we apply in a context and for a purpose. To find reliable resources for teaching language in use and knowledge about language, Ian suggests looking at Deborah Myhill’s work at the University of Exeter here and to the Englicious website, which Ian worked on during his time at UCL.
Why study ‘grammar’ at all then?
Some knowledge and understanding of the metalanguage allows us to discuss language in use in a critical way, and apply ourselves to dissecting attitudes and approaches to language. Whilst knowing the names of grammatical terms does not improve pupils’ writing, if our language lessons are a rich environment for talking about talking and writing, I think this would empower pupils to think about language more critically. Language is something we do, choices we make to reach goals we want to achieve, not something that is done to us. Grammar in context is an exciting approach with a focus on the writing, and what is happening with language, rather than simple labelling and identification of grammatical features. David Crystal talked about this as well in episode 8. Linguistic possibilities, creativity and meaning and choice underpin this approach.
There’s absolutely no research that suggests that explicit knowledge of grammatical terms equates with improved writing.
Ian Cushing on whether ‘clause level’ grammar knowledge improves writing
We finish off part 1 of our discussion by thinking about some of the words we put in front of ‘English’ such as ‘better’ or ‘standard’ or ‘articulate’. Who gets to decide what is better or standard? Do teachers have a responsibility to focus on ‘correct’ notions of language when teaching? Join the discussion on Twitter by following @langrevolution and @ian_cushing. Are you a student or a teacher? What do you think about current approaches to ‘grammar’?
Listen to Ian Cushing on The Language Revolution podcast on iTunes, Spotify, Amazon etc. or here:
We don’t often understand the process of learning to talk until we need speech and language therapy. It’s something parents have little information about. We hear a lot about sleeping, eating, and walking, but talking is a bit of a mystery subject. That is, until it goes wrong. Parents might then seek advice from a speech and language therapist like my podcast guest, Weronika Ozpolat. And if your child has more than one language? It’s good to find a speech pathologist who understands how bilingualism works, and how different cultures teach children to speak in different ways.
Let’s talk about talking
What is speech and language therapy?
Let’s start with the basics because I don’t think many of us know (I certainly didn’t!) the difference between a speech problem, a language problem, or a speech delay. What’s a delay and what’s a disorder? What does a speech and language therapist do?
Ronni explains that a language delay is what parents commonly describe as a child being ‘a late talker’. A speech delay is when children are having some difficulty pronouncing certain sounds. A disorder, however, is where the difficulty delays development by more than six months. She explains that it takes a number of years for children to be able to consistently produce a new sound. This is normal. I’ve tried to show this visually in the diagram below. The earlier sounds are the easier, single sounds. The later sounds are clusters and trickier sounds like ‘r’, ‘sh’, ‘th’ and ‘zh’ (as in measure). You can read more about this here in the Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders.
Like with any journey, language-learning has a number of milestones. For parents wishing to see how their child is getting on with talking, it is not helpful to compare their development with another child. Children all develop at their own pace. Ronni suggests looking out for the key milestone at age two years when children are expected to have between fifty and two hundred words. They may have more, but fifty is the expected minimum at age two. Children will also start putting two words together at age two (‘Daddy gone!’ is one I remember my children saying every time he left the room!) Three year olds will be putting three or four words together.
About one in five children start school with speech, language and communication needs. It is pretty common for children to need some support with their speech and language. This is true across all cultures and languages; any child could need some support. If parents feel that their preschooler is not meeting the developmental milestones above, contact your health visitor or GP for a speech and language referral.
The speech and language therapist will do an assessment to gauge the child’s language development. This might involve some playing and talking, and discussion with parents. They will then work out what kind of therapy is most likely to help with your child’s specific needs. There are all sorts of ways of helping speech development, and they will advise parents how to best support the child too.
To correct or not to correct?
Back to ‘normal’ or expected speech development. Young children have a limited range of speech sounds, and often it is only their parents who can understand them! There are also lots of cute ‘mistakes’ that children make, like saying ‘tat’ instead of ‘cat’ (this is called fronting, incidentally). These are nothing to worry about. It’s all part of the process of learning to talk. If they simplify words, like saying ‘nana’ instead of ‘banana’, parents can model the correct language by repeating ‘yes banana’. But it is not helpful to try and force a child to pronounce things correctly if they are not at the right age and stage. With lots of good modelling, they will get there eventually and all in good time.
My five year old still says ‘lellow’ instead of yellow, and is teased mercilessly by his older siblings. They have already forgotten that they did exactly the same thing! They also said ‘ephalent’ instead of ‘elephant’, and ‘psgetti’ instead of ‘spaghetti’. These are really tricky words with multiple syllables, but eventually they got them all in the right order.
Bilingualism and speech delays
It is a common myth that bilingual children are more prone to speech delays. I have talked about this with Katerina Draper and Eowyn Crisfield on previous episodes, and Ronni reaffirms that bilingualism does not cause speech delays. If a child is presenting a speech and language disorder, the speech therapist will look for signs of the disorder in all of the child’s languages. If the delay or disorder is only apparent in, say, English and not Polish, it is more than likely just a normal part of the child’s developmental process.
All speech and language difficulties will affect all children. It doesn’t matter whether they are monolingual, bilingual, multilingual… all children can develop some of these speech and language delays. Bilingualism does not lead to a speech delay.
Ronni Ozpolat on why bilingualism does not cause speech delays on the podcast
I think part of the confusion about language delays and language development is that we only use one word for language in English! In French we helpfully have le langage and la langue, to distinguish between language in general, and individual languages. A language delay/disorder underlies the acquisition of individual languages, so regardless of whether you’re learning one or ten languages, the disorder will appear across them all. If you are hearing impaired, for example, you won’t hear sounds and reproduce them. It doesn’t matter how many languages you are hearing, it’s the hearing that is the cause of the problem not the languages.
Autism and language
Children with a diagnosis of autism can have a diverse range of speech, language and communication issues. Some people might have above-average language skills, learning twenty or more languages, and others may be non-verbal. Autistic children can be raised bilingual. Ronni discusses why it is really important that a child with autism is not deprived of a language that is in their family. Even if a child is non-verbal, that doesn’t mean they do not understand what is being said. As I discussed with Eowyn, bilingualism is not just about speaking a language. Languages are part of our roots, our connections to our heritage, and our emotional bonds with caregivers. This is a really important section of the podcast, I think, as I’ve heard of families being advised not to speak to their autistic child in multiple languages. Has this ever happened to you?
There’s a saying (a rather old-fashioned one, perhaps!) that children should be seen and not heard. In some cultures, adults don’t speak to children at all, leaving it to other children to converse with the under-fives. In some cultures we focus a lot on the ‘naming of objects’ with young children. “Yes, that’s the cat! Oh did you see the fire engine?” And some cultures focus more on the verbs, or the functions of objects, rather than the names of them. There is such diversity in the way we talk to our children, that this will obviously have an effect on their speech development. No one way is better than another. The children all end up talking, regardless of the route taken (unless the adults deprive the child of language input – listen here to learn about that!)
A child who has heard more nouns will learn more names of objects. And, this is the key part, if a child is being assessed by a speech and language therapist who is not aware of cultural differences and practices around language development, they may equate words with nouns. This might then lead to a misdiagnosis, if they think the child doesn’t meet a developmental milestone, but they’ve just been measuring the wrong thing. We make a lot of assumptions based on our own experiences of how we do language. There is more than one way of raising our little talkers! Some culturally nuanced understanding of language development would be a very helpful thing for us to know as we live in increasingly diverse societies. Teachers and speech therapists get little training on this, which is a shame as it’s really interesting and helpful information.
I really enjoyed chatting to Ronni about how children’s language develops, and I’m delighted that she’s joining our ‘little language revolution’, Babel Babies. She will be offering families speech and language therapy appointments, and she specialises in bilingualism. You can read more about her here, and also on her blog Multicultural Motherhood. This is where you will find links to the parenting online courses that she mentions, and also find tons of brilliant ideas for homeschooling.
The term ‘EAL’ gets more airtime in educational circles these days because our world is becoming more super diverse. This means that our schools have more children who are learning English. But does ‘EAL’, which is short for ‘English as an Additional Language’, simply mean a child doesn’t speak English yet? Actually, it is much more nuanced and complicated than that. In the second part of my conversation with EAL specialist Eowyn Crisfield, we talk about how parents and schools can work together to support multilingual learners.
Let’s talk about talking!
What is EAL?
Let’s start with some definitions. When a child has a parent at home who speaks a language other than English, the school assigns that pupil EAL status. It is often used as a catch-all term to describe children who are learners of English. However, just having a parent who speaks another language does not mean a child is an English learner! In fact, the child might only speak English and not the home language.
The designation EAL is hugely misleading and could apply to a child who is an English monolingual or, the complete opposite, a child who speaks no English yet at all. Professor Victoria Murphy, chair of EAL subject association NALDIC and applied linguistics lecturer at the University of Oxford department of education, has called EAL a ‘reckless’ definition in the TES.
What is the impact of starting school on EAL learners?
When EAL pupils start school, this may be the first time they have encountered English, or they may already be bilingual in English and another ‘home’ language. Or they may fall somewhere in between. The impact of starting school is immense. They will have less contact time, and thus input, in their home language once they spend all day in an English-speaking environment. They will also start to notice that they are perhaps different and have a language that other children do not speak. Depending on how this affects their feelings about their home language, this is sometimes when children ask their parents not to speak to them in public in their home language.
Make children partners in language development
The way to support children in fostering a positive self-identity as a multilingual person is to make them partners in their own language journey. Language is not something that is done to them, it is something they actively choose. Without a positive approach to multilingualism in school, it is highly likely that a high-status language like English will swallow up the child’s home language. This is especially true when parents feel discouraged in continuing home language support, or that English is more important. As Eowyn said in part one, English is the ‘Pacman’ of languages because it eats up all the minority languages!
It is important to talk to children from an early age about their languages. This can begin when they are very small by simply talking about how mummy says ‘cheese’ and papa says ‘fromage’ for example. Then as children grow, the conversation around languages grows in an age-appropriate way. This develops the children’s metalinguistic awareness, that is, their understanding about languages. And this awareness, in turn, makes them better at learning languages.
The school environment has a huge impact on pupils’ attitudes and motivation when it comes to languages. If a school reflects the diverse multilingualism of its pupils, they are more likely to feel encouraged and maintain their multilingualism. If a school suppresses the languages of the pupils, they will work towards conforming to the monolingual ‘norm’.
Why does this matter, you might ask? Shouldn’t we focus on teaching them English?
Great question. You will be forgiven for thinking that in order to learn English, children need to spend more time learning English and less time on their home language. It sounds like a simple equation, right? But MORE ENGLISH does not actually support children learning English if it is at the expense of supporting their development in a more dominant or well-established home language.
Imagine a stack of bricks. As the tower gets taller, it requires firmer foundations or the whole thing topples over. Languages are the same. If a child as a strong foundation in their home language, it is a more secure platform for adding further languages on top. However, if you REMOVE a foundation block from the bottom, the entire stack might tumble.
The better their home language is, the better they’ll be at English
Eowyn Crisfield on maintaining home languages
The earlier the better, right?
Erm, not quite. Listen to episode 20 (part one of this conversation with Eowyn) for a fuller analysis, but in a nutshell, this is not as simple as it sounds either. Children at age four are slower to learn a language than they are at age 10. It takes them years longer, in fact, and they will all end up at the same place eventually anyway. This is because young children are still developing their cognitive (thinking) skills. We are worse at processing things when we are young, and get more complex thinking strategies with age.
So if you add in the complication of being a learner of English, it isn’t surprising that sometimes EAL children get misdiagnosed as having special educational needs. EAL does not equal SEND! It takes between 1 and 3 years for children to learn enough English to speak it (ask for pencils, play football, etc). It takes anywhere between 3 and 9 years for them to reach academic fluency, whereby they think and process at an age-appropriate level in English. Incredible, eh?
The younger they are when they start, the longer it will take them to learn the language.
Maintaining home languages is vital
The more developed children are cognitively, the better they are at learning English. Eowyn explains in really clear detail why cognitive development is entirely dependent on having age-appropriate language skills. It is therefore vital that children who do not have an age-appropriate level of English continue to have a rich home-language environment as this scaffolds and supports their learning of English as a second language.
What this means is:
Do not stop speaking and using your home language(s) when children start school!
The strength of the children’s home languages is going to pull them up the hill of learning English and make it easier to acquire English. This message is so important, I have written in big orange letters. Schools, do not advise parents to stop speaking their languages at home. Parents, if you are advised to drop your home language ‘to help your children learn English’ it is incorrect advice and will slow down their progress in English. The same is true, incidentally, if you move abroad and the children are being schooled in a new language, say, Spanish. They’ll need home-language support to access the curriculum in Spanish too, right?
Teacher training in EAL
The PGCE course for teacher training in England is so jam packed, there is no real time to learn about EAL. And since the government does not require it, individual courses have to decide whether or not to include training on EAL, language acquisition or bilingualism for teachers. If they do include a module on it, it means they are sacrificing training on another aspect of teaching. It’s a busy year!
So where can teachers get training on EAL? How can they find out about translanguaging and using home languages as a resource or scaffolding for learning in school?
Take a look at the NALDIC website, the national subject association for EAL. The blog is called EAL Journal (also available as a termly print journal) and is full of practice-related content from real teachers. I wrote a piece for it in January 2020, here. There are regional meetings of EAL specialists and teachers too, and an annual conference that is taking place online on 21st November 2020. You might also enjoy browsing the excellent RiPL network site, where you’ll find summaries of research and lots of practice-based ideas on improving language learning in primary schools.
I hope this blog and the podcast will encourage teachers to have a look at how the school environment reflects the actual languages of their pupils. Rather than taking a superficial approach with ‘food, flags and festivals’, how about discussing how to make translanguaging a reality in your school?
Perhaps your school or colleagues are nervous about letting the children speak all kinds of languages? What on earth are they saying in that language you don’t speak? Honestly, they are probably a) relieved to find someone they can discuss Pokémon with in depth, and b) glad of the mental respite of trying to speak their second (or third, or fourth…) language all day. When adults are immersed in a new language, we are exhausted too, and grateful to find some English speakers occasionally! It’s the same with children.
Eowyn has some brilliant ideas for embedding a truly multilingual approach into your school’s ethos. The best part is that encouraging parents and children to identify with and enjoy celebrating their home languages will really support the children who are learning English. And this multilingual approach has a positive effect on your monolingual English speakers too. Everyone is a linguist!
There’s a wealth of information on the Internet about bilingual education and raising bilingual kids. But for parents or teachers navigating their way through an online search, it often feels overwhelming. Facts can get taken out of context, and statistics from research are quoted as set in stone. However, the science of bilingualism is relatively young and ever-evolving. I discussed raising bilingual children in Episode 5 with psychology lecturer Dr Katerina Draper. In Episode 20, I talk to Eowyn Crisfield in more detail about what parents need to know about bilingual education.
Let’s talk about talking!
There are some prevalent myths around bilingual education that I’ve heard time and again whilst teaching Babel Babies, or chatting to other adults about my work. A couple of favourites are that ‘children are sponges’ and ‘the earlier the better’. Eowyn explains why these statements are problematic. The metaphor of children being ‘sponges’ suggests they are inactive absorbers of languages. Babies are actually conducting scientific experiments with language from early on. They actively pursue knowledge about which contexts to use which languages in, and for what purpose.
It is not quite as simple as saying ‘the earlier the better’ either. Yes, early bilingual education can be effective but success can look different for different families and even for children within the same families. Therefore some understanding of the different processes is really helpful for parents navigating the subject. ‘Bilingual first language acquisition’ is where children learn two languages from before the age of two, and ‘sequential language acquisition’ is where they learn first one language, and then add others to their linguistic repertoire after the age of two. These are different approaches and one isn’t necessarily better than another. A lot depends on the situation and context of each individual family.
Family language planning
This is why Eowyn advocates for parents to understand more of the science of bilingualism than they perhaps imagine they need. Surely bilingualism just happens naturally, in the right context? Well yes, if there are multiple languages used regularly in a child’s home and supported in the wider family and community, as is often the case in South Africa or India for example, children can appear to acquire more than one language effortlessly. If, however, parents are raising a child away from the community where their language is dominant (eg, raising a child with Greek whilst living in London), it’s helpful to have a plan of how to make sure the child hears enough Greek to acquire it.
The family language plan involves parents, family members, teachers and the child(ren), and is a dynamic document. It flows with a family’s needs and goals, rather than being set in stone. Eowyn explains why planning ahead can also be really helpful when facing skeptics, such as family members or health professionals who do not understand bilingual education. It turns parents into advocates for their own children’s multilingualism.
How much is enough?
Coming back to the question of ‘how much language is enough input?’ Eowyn analyses a few key statistics that people often quote as fact. Do children need 20% or 30% input in a language to become bilingual? Parents are perhaps seeking certainty, or quantifiable amounts of language that can be charted, when in fact what matters is the quality of the language a child hears at home.
Quality is more important than quantity.
Eowyn Crisfield on the question of ‘how much’ language a child needs to hear to become bilingual
It’s a fairly repetitive task being a parent, and we often repeat the same basic language to our children: where are your shoes, have you brushed your teeth, it’s time to go, etc. For successful language acquisition, children need to hear a rich and varied amount of language rather than merely the same things over and over again. When there is more than one language to learn, time is divided between the languages. If we only want them to be able to understand and say those basic everyday things, that’s absolutely fine. The key thing is to measure our expectations, whether that is full literacy and spoken fluency or achieving simpler communicative levels of a language, and to plan accordingly. Higher expectations will require higher levels of quality input.
Starting school and bilingualism
‘Should I stop speaking to my child in the home language when they start school?’ is a question we often hear, and sadly many parents have been told to do this by teachers or health professionals. Even speech and language therapists might offer this advice if they do not understand how bilingualism works. It is particularly common in the UK and US where English is a dominant and ‘high status’ language. Eowyn told me she calls English the ‘Pacman’ of languages because it eats up all the minority languages. We will discuss bilingualism in school in more detail in part two. Here is one of our favourite quotes from bilingual education Professor Jim Cummins to whet your appetite!
We are faced with the bizarre scenario of schools successfully transforming fluent speakers of foreign languages into monolingual English speakers, at the same time as they struggle, largely unsuccessfully, to transform English monolingual students into foreign language speakers.
Jim Cummins, (2005). A proposal for action: Strategies for recognising heritage language competence as a learning resource within the mainstream classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 585–591.
Cyclical bilingualism, passive bilingualism and semilingualism
Sometimes even the words we use to talk about bilingual education can sound terrifying! It’s no wonder that the topic is shrouded in mystery and parents can feel lost. Eowyn and I talk about some of the terms that we hear more frequently on social media and what they mean. We also discuss which languages parents ‘should’ pass on, and when it’s possibly better to let one language remain passive (so a child understands it but doesn’t answer you using it).
Eowyn Crisfield is an international bilingual educational consultant, senior lecturer on multilingual education at Oxford Brookes University, member of the executive committee for NALDIC (the national subject association for English as an additional language in the UK), and mother of three trilingual children. Her book, Bilingual Families, is being published by Multilingual Matters in early 2021.
Join Eowyn and Cate on the podcast by clicking below, or on iTunes, Spotify and Podbean. Let’s keep the conversation going on Twitter! You can find Eowyn on @4bilingualism and me (Cate) on @langrevolution or @lomo_linguist.
There’s a wealth of information on the Internet about bilingual education and raising bilingual kids. But for parents or teachers navigating their way through an online search, it often feels overwhelming. Facts can get taken out of context, and statistics from research are quoted as if they are set in stone. However, the science of bilingualism is relatively young and ever-evolving. In Episode 20 I talk to Eowyn Crisfield in detail about what parents need to know in order to steer their family through the rocky waters of bilingual education. This is part one of a two-part series. Part two looks at EAL education in schools, so this episode is a good foundation for teachers too.
Studying languages at university might soon be a thing of the past. Over the last decade, more than ten universities in the UK have closed their modern languages departments. There is a steep decline in the uptake of languages at GCSE, A Level and at university. Are we too late to reverse this trend? How can we empower teachers to feel confident about exploring languages? Can we enthuse pupils to love learning languages from an early age? In Episode 19, I talk to Sascha Stollhans, who teaches German at the University of Lancaster. He works closely with schools through the outreach programme and the Linguistics in MFL project. Here we talk about how to join up our efforts to ‘save’ languages, and how linguistics might be the key to the sustainable future of language education.
Beginning with some statistics about the alarming decline in the study of languages at university, Sascha issues a clear call to action. We need to join up our efforts across education, from early years to higher education. Let’s start to look at languages differently and reframe how we ‘sell’ languages to teenagers at school. As I discussed with Charlotte Ryland in Episode 14, translation is a creative puzzle and builds cultural knowledge as well as language skills. Yet at A Level it can feel more like a test of grammar and vocabulary than a creative activity. The GCSE curriculum is also very transactional, as discussed at length with MFL Transform in Episodes 15 and 16. So what does Sascha propose we do?
Look at languages differently
Language is a fascinating, complex subject with links across the curriculum, and yet we tend to see it touted as a transactional tool. The ‘usefulness’ argument belies how interesting the subject is and many students do not know what to expect from a languages degree. Sascha explains how 75% of the undergraduates in one study he carried out said they chose to continue studying languages because they love the culture, politics, history and society of the countries as much as the languages themselves. This is really at odds with the constant focus on employability and usefulness, and perhaps it is time to retire that argument and focus instead on what the students might find more intrinsically motivating.
What is being done to reverse the decline in languages at university? Well, the short answer is ‘not enough’. Whilst there is an All Party Parliamentary Group for languages, and the British Academy et al published the Towards a National Languages Strategy document in July 2020, not enough is being done at a political level to promote the importance and relevance of languages. However, there are many excellent grassroots initiatives and partnerships between universities and schools, competitions, mentoring programmes, and a lot of energy and enthusiasm from the sector.
We could also genuinely value UK multilingualism and multiculturalism more visibly. Perhaps a good start would be changing the census question on languages spoken to reflect our multilingual society accurately, rather than promoting English dominance, as Thomas Bak explained in Episode 3?
What to expect from languages at university
Another issue is that studying languages at university is quite different to studying A Level or GCSE languages. University departments are made up of specialists with a broad range of interests, and lecturers teach their speciality subject, such as 19th-century novels for example. There is a broader ‘menu’ on offer at university level, with knowledge of culture, politics and critical thinking skills valued just as highly as being able to use the language(s). First year students are often surprised, Sascha says, that essays are written in English, or that there is no prescription for the number of tenses and pronouns to use in a translation. Students have more agency, creativity and freedom to experiment because universities set their own assessments, whereas school languages departments have external exam boards to answer to.
Since the curriculum at school is unlikely to change any time soon, Sascha suggests that teachers get in touch with local universities to work together to show pupils what studying languages at university is like. Outreach really matters and universities will be keen to work with schools. Lancaster has a YouTube channel, for example, with sample lectures to help students take the first steps towards imagining themselves as language students at university.
Language is a cultural, political and sociological phenomenon. It is about people and it is a fascinating subject with almost infinite angles. The ‘Mount Everest of subjects’ as David Crystal calls it. Sascha and I believe that introducing concepts from linguistics into schools, from early on, could really help build conceptual bridges between language acquisition (learning French or German etc) and the humans who use those languages. The fantastic Linguistics in MFL project is working with schools to introduce linguistics topics linked to the A Level languages topics. Pupils in the pilot studies have loved learning some linguistics, finding it really motivating to understand some of the history, etymology, phonology, und so weiter of the languages they are studying. Teachers, please get in touch with Sascha and the team if you’d like to learn more, and follow @inmfl on Twitter.
Seeing languages differently is why my own Twitter handle is @lomo_linguist, as Lomo cameras have all sorts of cool lenses to give us new perspectives. I am, like Sascha, hopeful that by joining up our efforts and continuing to talk about our passion for languages, we can help the next generation fall in love with languages too. But in a way that works in the 21st century.
Listen the podcast on iTunes, Spotify, and online below. You can also read the Multilingual is Normal anthology, sixty collected voices talking about talking that I published on 10th August, online on Kindle, Apple or Barnes and Noble, and in paperback here.
How are trolling, trust and language education linked? What have Shakespeare, Dickens and French classes got to do with GDPR or Trump’s tweets? In part two of our discussion, Dr Yin Yin Lu and I talk about the dark side of communicating on social media, whether we can trust current regulation processes (such as GDPR), and how language education is the key to feeling less manipulated and more in control of the way we consume and create our experience of talking to each other online.
In this episode of The Language Revolution podcast, we begin by looking at the regulation of our online communications. Early social media platforms did not expect to become the place where humans create and consume the most content. They are now just catching up with the fact that the vast majority of online human communication takes place on social media.
Having taken a hands-off approach at first, platforms such as Facebook are now taking more responsibility for regulating content. However, since online communication is a socio-technical phenomenon (as we discussed in episode 17), it is fairly complex and requires a range of theoretical and technical skills. Do the regulators have those skills? Or are the most up-to-date experts actually all working for the social platforms themselves?
It’s not pretty, but we cannot ignore the darker side of spending so much time communicating online. Trolling has become a tangible problem that has ramifications in real life as well as online. It can ruin people’s lives. Troll and bot networks, Yin explains, may have an economic incentive to behave very differently online to how they’d behave IRL. My own experience of being trolled after questioning a company on its sustainability policy is nothing compared to Lauren Batchelder, who questioned Trump’s attitude to women at a rally. She received sustained online abuse (explored in Trump in Tweets on BBC3).
Just look at Microsoft’s TayBot experiment to see how quickly an AI bot, set up as a teenage girl and targeted at 18-24 year olds on Twitter, descended into behaving like a racist, fascist, feminist-bashing troll. It had to be taken down within 24 hours of launching as it learned how to be a troll from conversations with followers. What is it that makes humans behave so differently online to how they would behave in a room full of people?
Then there’s the question of ‘authenticity’ online. I have studied this as a business owner because I want my brand, Babel Babies, to come across as a credible and genuinely good choice for consumers interested in exploring languages with their young children. It matters to me that people know I am a real person with a human mission to improve language education and not a huge corporation incentivised by capitalism. This kind of marketing authenticity is really interesting to look at in more detail. Social networks are, after all, where real people have conversations and so if I can have real conversations with potential customers, that is the first step in digital marketing for a small business. It’s also what Trump does, by tweeting himself and being ‘authentic’.
Social media was leveraged during the Brexit campaign and in elections our data is used to inform how parties communicate their message to win our votes. Have politics and digital marketing become the same thing? Are we just pawns in a giant game of capitalism?
Education is the answer
Rather than let ourselves be victims to data brokerage and trolls, we can educate ourselves about how ‘talking’ works online. We can look at who is speaking, what their incentive is, and what they know about us. We can look at the context of when and where they are speaking to us. Sound familiar? That’s because we do a lot of this in English literature and English language classes. There’s a case for examining ‘classic’ tweets and Reddit threads alongside the classics of English literature like Shakespeare or Dickens. The sociology of language and literature is a great place to start learning the language of the internet age. Learning new languages brings new perspectives too, and through understanding language(s) we can create and consume in a more intelligent way.
We can teach ourselves and our students how to question things critically. Trolling might seem powerful but, ultimately, language is power. And we think the earlier we start this language revolution, the better!
There’s no denying that communication has rapidly changed in the last thirty years. But are we humans keeping up with technology that we are creating? Social media platforms give us many new contexts in which to create and consume communication. How has the way we talk and behave changed since the invention of the internet? In Episode 17 I talk to Dr Yin Yin Lu, self-proclaimed ‘rhetoric doctor’, about talking in the 21st century. Is it time for a communication revolution?
How we talk, socialise and behave is shifting. We are communicating more rapidly than ever before in human history. Our devices quantify how much communication we are missing. Those little counts of unread notifications pop up to remind us that the conversation is flowing with or without us. We’ve invented terms like FOMO to describe the feeling of missing out when we are not plugged into our feeds.
The ‘feed’ is a good metaphor for how we consume communication on our devices. Yin likens Instagram to a sugar high, where everything is perfect and beautiful as we scroll through our feed. We feel great, energised. However, we can feel deflated and even depressed when confronted with our unfiltered, imperfect reality off the screen.
Everything about communication has got faster and faster in the last thirty years. It is, Yin says, like a ‘Tesla in ludicrous mode’ and there is still potential for greater speed to come.
So what is this doing to our brains, since humans evolve pretty slowly compared to all this new technology? The super fast communication that confronts us every day can trigger fight or flight responses. It can even shut down our more nuanced, empathetic responses. The new communicative contexts and expectations come with new challenges for our brains.
Algorithms vs humans?
It’s not just social media that is changing how we communicate. We are now used to having automated filters on our emails, classifying what counts as spam for example. We are arguably comfortable with automatic translations of tweets, and see Google Translate as a useful tool in addition to dictionaries. (See previous episode with Charlotte Ryland.) But have you heard about GPT-3? Would you be comfortable handing over your personal language choices to an algorithm?
Where does the technology stop before it takes over human creativity and word play? It’s a really interesting question.
There is plenty of work on ‘text speak’ and how language is changing as technology evolves. David Crystal talks about this on a previous episode. What is perhaps less well documented is not the divide in vocabulary between younger and older generations. Tech design is more intuitive to the younger generations, the digital natives. To older people, smart phones are less intuitive. This isn’t necessarily bad. However, it does mean that the regulators (the adults) may not understand the implications of communication across new tech. It’s a whole new design dialect, Yin argues. It is complex, multifaceted, and we need communication science to become a key subject in order to understand the changing face of human communication.
We are wandering into uncharted communicative territory without a map, or a guide. We cannot say that social media is categorically good or bad for our mental health. We can, however, be wary of teaching our children to shout a female name and expect an immediate response (Alexa, play The Beatles!) What ramifications does this have for future female equality? Education, law and human biology have a lot of catching up to do with technology. Sexism is currently being coded into our technological devices.
There is joy and creativity in new communicative contexts. TikTok allows us to remix videos, music and text. Theatre is embracing the new online space, as you can see in previous guest Ben Crystal’s latest work with his Shakespeare Ensemble. There is hope. But without awareness of the education gap that is widening with every new development, we could soon find ourselves lost. We need to think about communication science, and quickly.
Let’s talk about talking in the 21st century! Join me on Twitter on @langrevolution and read/listen to more of Yin’s work about communication science in her excellent Medium article here.