Eight years ago Alison Crump dreamed up this class blog when she taught Educational Sociolinguistics in the Department of Integrated Studies in Education (DISE), McGill University…then, leaving the site of her (stellar) doctoral work behind her, Alison moved on to other things and left it first to me and then to DISE colleagueCaroline Riches to carry on the blogging tradition in this course. We continued the blog in 2019, 2020 and 2022; the results are below—all one has to do is scroll down. I’m delighted to once more be at the Educational Sociolinguistics helm for a term, and hope both our graduate student bloggers and their reading audience will enjoy the ongoing journey.
I encourage readers also to explore the BILD/LIDA blog that our research community started in 2014, and our Journal of Belonging, Identity, Language and Diversity (J-BILD), also dreamed up by original Senior Managing Editor Alison Crump and her co-editor and erstwhile fellow DISE doctoral researcher Lauren Halcomb-Smith; Alison and Lauren launched the journal in 2017 (yes, two recently graduated PhDs can launch a successful open-access online journal!). These three online locations—the journal, the BILD/LIDA blog and this class blog—are all excellent sources of current thinking, arguing, theorizing, speculating and general learned merrymaking about the ways people interact with each other through language as they attempt to get along in society. Speakers trip over each other a lot, as you know if you live mostly in English in Quebec; they tread on each others’ linguistic toes, they help each other up, they stumble on together—and, every so often, they manage to dance.
As we are all aware, many teens use social media outlets for multiple hours, daily. From scrolling through TikTok, to watching endless YouTube videos, Twitter, Instagram, you name it, they’re on it. Upon the topic of teens time spent online, an interesting question to raise is how their language skills may be influenced by social media and whether this influence is something that teachers should shut down or use to learners’ benefit.
Based on my experience teaching English Language Arts to learners aged 13-16, it has come to my attention that many students speak and write in their ‘online literacy’ language. The most notable part of it is the use of acronyms and shortened words for writing in class. Words such as through are written as thru, to be honest as tbh, okay as ok, going to written and spoken as gonna, etc. The list can indeed go on. All of this to say, students are thus using a new form of language online that is not always translated well into the school curriculum.
When reading through my students’ final responses I was quite shocked. I was wondering what I can do to address my students needs as digital media users for them to understand the difference between informal online language and language that is expected in formal writing in class. I started with a discussion of comparing some of the acronyms that I found in their responses as well as their proper form. The thing is students say they are aware that they are using their online lingo in class. All this said, is it just a habit then, that influences their use of online language in class?
In addition to the shifts in writing skills from the influence of social media, I have noticed that students use the slang in their daily conversation approach with their peers as well as me, their teacher. Though, where am I to draw the line? I often get “Yo, Miss Alison!” Although I am not bothered by it, being a young teacher, I know it is not meant to be disrespectful. Whereas other teachers that I work with may be bothered by students’ current methods of speech and are unaware of the fact that this is indeed how teens speak to each other online and in person.
This discussion of specific forms of language belonging to either online or in school can be tied together by exploring the idea of style. According to Van Herk (2018), language users often shift the way they speak depending on the context. Typically, individuals evaluate the situation in which they are participating in and decide which language style is best fitting to the particular situation (Herk, p. 126). Moreover, the degree of formality is the focus that is being changed when discussing the topic of internet slang VS. academic writing as well as informal chatting and greeting with teachers such as “Yo, Miss Alison”. That said, the ability to shift depending on context is a skill, thus, a skill to indeed be practiced.
That said, where should the line be drawn? Am I to expect students to speak to me the same way they are expected to write in formal English? Also, how has their social media experiences influenced the way they speak and is this where the shift is coming from?
Questions:
Does social media influence teen’s language in the classroom? How can teachers promote students multiple literacies? Is there a form of language that should be solely used in school?
Source:
Van Herk, Gerard. (2018). What is sociolinguistics? 2e Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
One day in the French class in the Francisation program, I was practicing French with my classmates. When I said “je vais t’attendre chez KFC ”, my classmate reminded me that KFC here in Montreal is called PFK. Then, I immediately asked what the people here call “the apple store” which sells iphones. Do they change it into “une pomme”? She laughed without giving me an answer.
I googled when I returned home, and I found out the apple store is still the apple store but KFC here becomes PFK. This is because of the Section 63 of Quebec French language charter, which states that the name of an enterprise must be in French. But why has only KFC changed its name, while the Apple Store, Dairy Queen, Subway and many other brands have not. Some people explained that if the brand does not make sense in French, then they change their names. For example, Shopper’s Drug Mart goes by Pharmaprix in Quebec because Quebecois would be confused by “shopper’s”, and they might think this is a proper name rather than referring to someone who goes to the store as a “shopper”. Canadian Tire also does not change the name because most French people can understand those two words. To some extent, we can think that brands which change their name try their best to integrate into the local society to attract customers. As long as the brands’ name does not cause confusion, they do not need to change the name. However, for those world-known brands like KFC, does their name really cause confusion? Is it really necessary for them to change the name?
The localization of names also happens to people. People tend to have a local name when they go to a new country. However, when I just arrived at the first course at McGill, the professor said that you do not need to change your name to an English name. Every professor will try hard to learn your own name. But many Chinese people I met outside McGill will still use their English names because it is easy to pronounce and remember by local people. And having an English name may also provide them with more interview opportunities. Some may have other reasons for using an English name.
Here is a link for the discussion about why Chinese have an English name:
For me, I think no matter what, people or brands should be empowered to choose which name they want to use other than being forced to have a localized name. When people try to learn and become accustomed to the local cultures, the local society also needs to become more inclusive to them. Also, people who do want to have a localized name also need to be willingly accepted instead of having to use their real name. Inclusion should be inclusive across the board, not just one aspect!
Questions:
Do you have any examples of foreign brands having a localized name when they enter your country? From your perspective, should brands keep their original names or should they change to a new local name?
Do you give yourself a localized name when you stay in another country? Do you feel comfortable using that? Do you prefer to use your own name given by parents?
Supporters of neoliberal economics believe that property rights and “the natural order of things” are important (Orlowski, 2011), so they just let the “invisible hand” of the market to influence economic arrangement. In this case, native-speakerism will win the game, and language education will become more and more market-oriented too.
Language education, especially English education in non-English-speaking countries will become a commodity which only the elites can buy and consume well. Take private schools in mainland China as examples. There are three types of private schools in mainland China: international school (IS), non-governmental private school (NGPS), and public high school international division (PHSID). Among these, the first two types are more expensive as they are totally private and have much affiliation and cooperation with western universities and institutions. For example, the total tuition fee for first year kindergarten children at Dulwich College Beijing (IS) is 241500 CNY, and the tuition fee at YK Pao School (NGPS) is 156000 CNY. The tuition fee will be even higher at junior and senior high school level.
Comparing to public language education system in China, which may cost only thousands per year, the language education in private schools can be considered as a “luxury product”. As we are in a neoliberal economics, access, networking, and experiences are paramount. (Rifkin, 2000) The new generations of social elites may build their networking in these schools and keep their identity through this system. In this sense, English, native-speakerism, and language education may be related to wealth and power, and finally link to social reproduction.
REFERENCES
Orlowski, P. (2011). Neoliberalism Laissez-Faire Revisited. Explorations of Educational Purpose.
Davies, B. & Bansel, P. (2007). Neoliberalism and education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20(7), 247-259.
Olssen, M. & Peters, M. A. (2007). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: from the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy, 20(3), 313-345.
In my process of acquiring French, one of the most difficult things I find is trying to remember masculine or feminine French words. Like many other languages, French is gendered: pronouns, verbs, nouns and adjectives reflect the gender of the object or the person they refer to.
In French, there is not a word like “they” that is gender neutral. Most critically, the masculine is always given priority over the feminine. For instance, a French speaker would still use the masculine plural, ils, to refer to a group that consists of even 1 man and 10 women (although some people mentioned that it has changed a bit, still that’s how we learned in the francisation course here in Quebec). However, although in the past some words that have only masculine lexemes, such as “professeur” (teacher) and “avocat” (lawyer), are additionally preceded by “femme” if one wants to refer to a woman, now things are changed. For example, under the new rules, professions such as doctors, teachers and professors will now have female-only names in the official dictionary published by the Académie Française. For example, the term “doctor” is currently used for both men and women, while the word “doctor” will be added to the feminine suffix and become “docteur. However, the French Academy, which has an overwhelmingly male membership, has fiercely opposed the feminization of professional titles, saying it would bring “exponential complexity” and even “fatal disaster” to the French language.
Not only French, but my mother language, Chinese, also contains many sexist words that discriminate women group. For example, there is a famous Chinese saying “男人四十一枝花，女人四十豆腐渣”, which means after men reach the age of 40, they will become more attractive and more appreciative while women reach the age of 40, just like tofu dregs, worthless and no nutrition, will not attract others. This is a very insulting saying and devalues women, but few people would associate it with sexism and most of them just use it without scruples.
Sexist language has been defined as “words, phrases, and expressions that unnecessarily differentiate between women and men or exclude, trivialize, or diminish either gender” (Parks & Roberton, 1998a, p. 455). Most of the sexist languages, from my understanding, are demeaning and discriminatory towards women. Although the status of women has increased dramatically, they are still in a disadvantaged position and are still a vulnerable group.
Language always changes with the social, political, cultural and other developments of the time. Sexism in language needs to be taken seriously and a more neutral approach needs to be thought of. We need to raise women’s awareness through the study of linguistic sexism so that women will not be the victims of linguistic discrimination. Hopefully, we could develop a more gender-inclusive language and encourage people to use it in the future.
As a language teacher, I like the idea of hearing more languages being spoken everywhere. It translates to a persons’ full linguistic repertoire being used and honoured. However, in Quebec, the act of greeting people in more than one language has become a controversy. It is so well known that Saturday Night Live even made a skit about it.
According to Van Herk (2018), code switching is a common phenomenon. It is a linguistic resource many communities use to signal a bi-cultural identity. Montreal being in a French province within an English dominant country, complicates the situation. As stipulated by the Charter of the French Language, all workers must carry their activities in French. However, many retail and business workers use the expression Bonjour-Hi, to indicate their fluency in both languages and to provide courteous customer service.
In October 2019, the Quebec government expressed his will to eliminate the bilingual expression Bonjour-Hi in businesses and government services. This statement came after the Office Québécois de la langue française (OQLF), who oversees the preservation of French, revealed that greetings in French dropped from 84 to 75% between 2010 and 2017. Thus, Simon Jolin-Barette, the minister responsible for the French language, sees this as evidence that the official language of the province is under threat.
Following Jolin-Barette’s announcement, the Bloc Québécois posted an advertisement on Twitter promoting the alternative expression “Bonjour-HO”. This holiday campaign aims at stamping out the bilingual greeting Bonjour-Hi. However, many people on social media pointed out the that the phrase might not be appropriate because the word “ho” carries a markedly different meaning than Santa Claus’s ho-ho-ho.
Avec la campagne «2021 : On touche du bois!», on vous offre nos meilleurs voeux à notre manière afin que l’année qui vient soit meilleure que 2020. Montréal bénéficiera également de la campagne «Bonjour–HO !» qui met de l’avant l’usage du français. Joyeuses Fêtes! @yfblanchetpic.twitter.com/Z7GkakMncm
In my opinion, the expression Bonjour-Hi is what makes the city of Montreal unique. This greeting should be kept in the same way because it promotes inclusivity and respect for both languages. Our province’s financial resource should not be allocated to separate the anglophones and the francophones any further. Policies should also focus on expanding and not reducing people’s linguistic repertoire. That said, what are your thoughts on the proposed banning of Bonjour-Hi?
References
Gouvernement du Québec. (n.d.). Office québécois de la Langue Française. Accueil – Office québécois de la langue française. Retrieved October 27, 2022, from https://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/accueil.aspx
Québécois, B. (2020, December 13). Avec la campagne “2021. Twitter. Retrieved October 27, 2022, from https://twitter.com/BlocQuebecois/status/1337915163090030596?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1337915163090030596%7Ctwgr%5Ecdecb1b29c9448fb27db955ae6e0d4e1f375c097%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.timeout.com%2Fmontreal%2Fnews%2Fheres-how-montrealers-are-reacting-to-replacing-bonjour-hi-with-bonjour-ho-121420
Sandler, G. (2022, January 12). SNL did a skit about Montreal last night & it was brutal. MTL Blog. Retrieved October 27, 2022, from https://www.mtlblog.com/montreal/snl-did-a-skit-about-montreal-it-was-brutal
Van Herk, Gerard. (2018). What is sociolinguistics? 2e Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley- Blackwell.
In Chapter 12 of “What is Sociolinguistics?” Gerard Van Herk (2018) states that schools are a place where language ideologies collide with standard ideologies and speakers of marginalized languages are suppressed by the majority language (p. 212).
The COVID-19 pandemic forced educators and students to adapt to an online learning reality. Although we are more technologically ‘savvy’ with our smartphones, laptops, tablets and so on, it doesn’t mean teaching online is automatically easy.
Bailey and Lee (2020), studied the challenges and benefits of online instruction for both teachers and students. Although teachers who previously taught online had less challenges, the one common challenge among language teachers was the ability to find “live communication” time (p. 179). Bailey and Lee (2020) stated this challenge as one of the reasons language learning has previously been taught offline. One challenge might be that inexperienced teachers are unfamiliar with online teaching and learning platforms and cannot harness their benefits. That’s not to say experienced online teachers had less trouble.
Teachers and students around the world are aware of or or learn using the videoconferencing platform Zoom. Zoom facilitates interactions by allowing hosts and co-hosts to share their screen, participants use their microphones and cameras, and a chat box to engage without interrupting.
There are non-verbal feedback icons to raise your hand, answer yes or no, ask the speaker to go slower or faster, and emojis such as thumbs up. Both the participant and host have access to these features; however, host features are a bit different because they respond to the non-verbal participants use.
This is the non-verbal feedback participants are able to use.
These features can create a more interactive experience for participants and teachers. There are lots of other benefits such as student led classes, using other platforms such as Kahoot! or Mentimeter, engaging in real time. Other platform and online challenges Bailey and Lee (2020) found were: students getting distracted and technical issues.
What does this mean for language learning ?
Challenges
Bailey and Lee (2020) state two main potential challenges for language learning are are “authentic communication opportunities” and restricted “participation and classroom engagement” (p. 181). Participation and engagement may be restricted due to course design and lesson planning. Additionally, according to Gillet-Swan (2017), staff are required to learn and achieve higher levels of “technological competency and proficiency” in addition to their pre-existing workload.
Top 5 Benefits
Activities can be tailored to student needs (Pourhossein Gilakjani, 2014).
Online teachers are not the only information source, engaging in student led activities, teachers become participants (Riasati, Allahyar, & Tan, 2012).
Improved critical thinking (Hamann et al., 2012).
Students tend to be more open and show more reflection (Ellis et al., 2004).
In small group sizes, students are more engaged, increased discussions and they produce better learning outcomes (Hamann et al., 2012).
Looking toward the future and returning to Van Herk’s (2018) statement, a potential benefit of online language learning may be that marginalized language speakers find they have more power and louder voice using these platforms.
Questions:
What are some benefits and challenges you have experienced with online learning?
Have you found any benefits learning language/s online?
References
Bailey, D. R., & Lee, A. R. (2020). Learning from experience in the midst of covid-19: benefits, challenges, and strategies in online teaching. Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 21(2), 178-198.
Gillett-Swan, J. (2017). The challenges of online learning: Supporting and engaging the isolated learner. Journal of Learning Design, 10(1), 20-30. https://doi.org/10.5204/ jld.v9i3.293
Hamann, K., Pollock, P. H., & Wilson, B. M.. (2012). Assessing Student Perceptions of the Benefits of Discussions in Small-Group, Large-Class, and Online Learning Contexts. College Teaching, 60(2), 65–75. http://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2011.633407
Kohnke, L., & Moorhouse, B. L.. (2020). Facilitating Synchronous Online Language Learning through Zoom. RELC Journal, 003368822093723. http://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220937235
Nonverbal feedback during meetings. (n.d.). Zoom Help Center. Retrieved December 3, 2020, from https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/115001286183-Nonverbal-feedback-during-meetings
Pourhossein Gilakjani, A. (2014). A detailed analysis over some important issues towards using computer technology into the EFL classrooms. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(2), 146-153. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2014.020206
Riasati, M. J., Allahyar, N., & Tan, K. E. (2012). Technology in language education: Benefits and barriers. Journal of Education and Practice, 3(5), 25-30. https://www.iiste.org/ Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/1495/1427
In a world where there are thousands of languages; it is impossible for all people to have a standard way of speaking a certain language. In fact, there exist many variations within a specific language. A sociolinguistic approach towards language is fairer than a linguistic approach because it is based on the evidence in the real world (Van, 2018). Developing rules and constraints to describe how the ‘ideal’ language should be spoken or what is regarded as competent is not practical in the real world. Considering that speaking a language in a certain way is what is correct creates a homogenous speech community which is unfair for people like non-native students.
With the increasing number of international students in universities, marking practices are a major concern. According to Hudson; students who use dialects in universities face challenges in learning to read (Hudson, 2001). Other varieties of a language should be regarded correct hence nonnative speakers’ way of communication should be correct even for educational purposes. It is difficult for everyone to learn the standard variety of a language which is considered correct. I agree with the argument that certain language features are not wrong as they would be considered in the standard language variety (Van Herk, 2018). Nonstandard language is just a different way of saying the same thing. Language should not be used to gauge the competence of a student or performance. Accepting the different variations of language used by students is beneficial to them (Cheshire, 2005). If students are allowed to express themselves in essays and other evaluations through the variety that they are used to, they could be more successful than when forcing them to use a certain standard language. We should take into consideration that language policies and language teaching and learning policies should comply with the dynamic nature of language and culture, focusing on the collective shifting from monolingualism and monoculturalism to plurilingualism and pluriculturalism.
Reflection Questions:
1. Should the same marking criteria be used for native students and non-native students?
2. Could there be a possibility that many non-native students have failed to score high grades because of language barrier?
References
Cheshire, J.(2005). Sociolinguistics and mother tongue education. InAmmon,U.,Dittmar,N. andTrudgill,P.(Eds). (2005). Sociolinguistics: An introductory handbook of the science of language and society(2nd) (2341-2350).Berlin: MoutondeGruyter.
Hudson, R.A. (2001). Sociolinguistics (2nded).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Herk, G.(2018). What is sociolinguistics? (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.
When discussing language attitudes and ideologies in class, an interesting question came up: should we correct people’s grammar? As demonstrated by Van Herk (2018), a language is in constant contact with other languages and experience the borrowing of words and expressions, changing significantly throughout its existence. Since it is normal for a language to change and to be used in different manners, should we insist on correct grammar?
This question brings up the aspect of prescriptivism vs descriptivism in language usage. Prescriptivism focuses on the correct and proper use of language, while descriptivism simply looks at how language is currently used (Wolfram & Schilling-Estes, 2016). Linguists are said to favour descriptivism, as changes in a language are a natural process. Additionally, Wolfram and Schilling-Estes (2016) state that certain forms of prescriptivism can replicate and reinforce social equalities, specifically for language users who use a non-standard form of English. This video explains the two terms in a general manner.
I completely understand how deciding that one variety of English is ‘standard’ and ‘proper’ essentially excludes all others from being correct. However, as an ESL teacher, I greatly question if accepting any form of grammar is beneficial to the learners. Students who learn a language typically want to sound fluent and as close to native-like as possible. If teachers do not insist on teaching correct grammar and do not give any corrective feedback when mistakes are made, the chances of students speaking with appropriate grammar are greatly reduced, thus impeding the students’ goals. Additionally, using incorrect grammar can lead to break-downs in communication. As an online teacher to low-level learners, I often face the reality that they can only express themselves in the present tense. This impedes expressing an appropriate message, since I cannot know if they are really speaking in the present or do not possess the grammar to speak in the past or any other tense. Grammar rules can be seen as demanding and overly-specific by others, but I appreciate how each verb tense communicates facts in different manners. For example: “I had been reading my book…” vs “ I was reading my book…’’. The first implies that in the past, while one was reading their book, something else happened. The second phrase implies that the action is in the past and done. If we do not insist on correct grammar and accept any usage, how can we know what the speaker meant?
As there are many language teachers in the classroom, I would love to know your thoughts. Should we insist on the proper usage of grammar for ESL learners? How can we use prescriptivist rules without replicating social inequities? How can we deal in break-downs in communication resulting from incorrect grammar usage?
When I passed through the newly opened Uniqlo in St.Catherine, I was thinking about the last snap up of Kaws- the collection of collaboration with American artist Kaws. And I heard that the new collection— +J line this year (collaboration with Jil Sander) has caused another panic buying.
Besides the collaboration of two fashion brands, there is another kind of collaboration, which is the combination of a brand and a folk art/culture form, also prevalent nowadays.
Here is an example in China:
Florasis (花西子) “Huaxizi” is a Chinese cosmetic brand founded in 2017 and this year it releases the new collection of Miao collaboration cosmetic. Miao is an ethnic minority in China with the population of approximate 9.5 million. Miao is famous for its silver design, but this kind of handicraft is rarely seen in our daily life and many people know it just through TV series and in tourist spots. Miao silver design is facing the problem of being lost.
According to this situation, Miao silver design needs more promotion and Huaxizi just seized this chance.
In the collection you could see the unique flower and butterfly totem in the silver package and the silver detail is beautiful and meticulous.
On one hand, many people hold the view that this collaboration has raised the vitality of a traditional culture and it is a good way for Chinese people, especially young generation to know this minority culture. And the collection has also received good reviews abroad. On the other hand, for Huaxizi, the traditional culture element increases the sales and it helps to establish a good brand image.
This win-win situation just reminds me that some strategies of protecting indigenous and minority language also include the idea of “collaboration” : dual language pedagogy, translanguaging, exploring more language forms, like poetry, holding some cultural festivals/events, etc.
And if we turn our attention to the fashion industry, we may find that the language/culture collaboration is everywhere. For example, the new bag collection of Loewe, a famous Spanish luxury brand, is called “Ikebana”, which means flower arrangement in Japanese. The design of the bag was inspired by the flower container in Japan in the 19th century. The collection attracts a number of people to search “what is Ikebana”, including one of my friends, and after searching, she told me that Ikebana is so exquisite and she wants to learn Ikebana from a Japanese teacher. It sounds so crazy, but, think about your Korean learning friends, maybe the reason is just a fascinating Korean TV drama!
According to Van Herk(2018), ethnolinguistic vitality has something to do with institutional support, power and prestige of languages, demography ad community choices (pp. 162-163). And from my point of view, the effective promotion of one language may benefit the learning population, (even from domestic to the world), and the power and prestige of this language, and maybe other aspects.
So I am wondering if the collaboration with the fashion industry(or other commercial forms), which young generations love could be transformed to a new way to revitalize indigenous and minority languages?
However, like every coin has two sides, “collaboration” is not always appreciated.
According to comments on the internet, the collaboration of Huaxizi and Miao has also sparked controversy: some netizens suggest that the commercial strategy will hurt the core of Miao culture; traditional culture is put in a disadvantaged position in business; automated manufacturing just distorts the value of hand making, etc.
Likewise, the collaboration of language and the fashion industry may face a similar problem. Besides the risk it may take, the collaboration may just serve as an “access” for people.
How to provide people with sufficient resources? How to teach? and how to maintain this learning enthusiasm? In Van Herk (2018), it is also stated that “Revitalizing languages is expensive, requiring dictionaries, grammars, teaching materials, teacher training, and facilities.” (p.174). These should all be taken into consideration and we need further research to see if the collaboration is workable.
Here are my questions:
1)Do you have some favorite collaboration collections(or crossovers)? Any items. 2)Have you ever seen any successful collaboration of language/culture and another industry? 3) Do you expect the collaboration of language/culture and another industry? If the answer is yes, what kind of things should the leader be careful with? If the answer is no, could you please tell us your opinion?
References:
Van Herk, G. (2018). What is sociolinguistics? 2e Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
