[MUSIC] In this session, we shall focus on the communicative practices of refugees and migrants students. And explore the current sociolinguistic approaches, to languages and communicative practices. The main objectives of the session are, to reflect on what the student's communicative practices are. Which languages they already use and in which contexts. And to introduce key concepts to describe the communicative competence of migrant and refugee students. Such as the concept of super diversity, truncated repertoires, plurilingualism, and translanguaging. The importance of students prior knowledge and learning processes as a premise, generally accepted in education. However, when it comes to learning the receiving languages. Migrant adult students are usually represented by clearly negative expressions. Such as, do not speak anything, or only speaks that language. This type of representation is based on a deficit, and assimilationist perspective. That does not recognize the previous knowledge. If as we have seen before, territories are projected as monolingual. It is very complicated to work from all the linguistic knowledge of the students. And to embrace the fluency of the communicative practices. But when we do not recognize this fluency, we maintain the idea that languages are learned in isolation. And even in competition, either you develop language one, or you develop language two. Since it is assumed that languages develop in isolation and in competition. The learning of a new language can only be understood as part of a process of linguistic assimilation. It's considered almost common sense, that you move from one language to the other. That to embrace a second language in the receiving country, it's a journey from your original language, language one. To the language of reception, language two. But what really are the communicative practices? What languages do your students already use? Let's go back to Parveen, and look at her communicative practices. Let's see which languages have a key role in her daily life. Parveen speaks many languages. Parveen's most usual language in our communicative practices with her family is Pathwari. One of the many languages of Pakistan. The language of a social encounters with people with Pakistani background is Urdu. In Pakistan, Urdu has become the language of prestige, after the country became independent. And Urdu was imposed as a national language, in the diaspora. Urdu has also become the language of communication among the Pakistani community. Parveen has some Arabic knowledge through the reading of Koran. And some knowledge of Hindi, through watching Indian television. In Pakistan, she used English in her work, and to support her children's education at an English middle school. Her children bring Catalan and Spanish home, where for instance they use these languages to talk. The siblings especially use Spanish in their daily communication, combined with other family languages. Or, they use Catalan and Spanish to help US bureaucratic processes. Parveen also comes into contact with Spanish to some extent through her daily shopping routines, or other family needs. Finally, she has also been in contact with Spanish through Spanish classes, when she was able to attend. So, Parveen's linguistic practices involve seven languages. However, her involuntary isolation in the receiving country, which we have analyzed in previous sessions. Undermines the possibilities of learning the languages of the territory of reception. But not just that, it also jeopardizes the linguistic knowledge she had needed and had used in the past. Such as English or even Urdu, because she has few possibilities to interact outside her home. It's important to understand, Perviness loss of knowledge of other valued languages. To repudiate these stereotype representations of migrant woman. Who chose to have isolation, because it seems they don't need the language of the country. And they don't want to learn. Perveen's communicative practices are rich, and not limited to just two languages. The language of origin and the language of reception. But her complex social economic situation. Places her in a weak position to keep learning or even to maintain her previous linguistic knowledge. Parveen's communicative practices are not exceptional at all nowadays. In recent decades, the processes generated by globalization. Have led to the questioning, of this fixed correspondence between territories and spoken languages. Concepts, such as superdiversity, coined by Stephen Vertovec. Describe a current reality that is much more diverse than that included in other concepts such as multiculturalism. Relatively small places can bring together multiple nationalities. Ethnicities, languages as well as many different experience in constant movement. In terms of language, the concept of superdiversity. Makes us question the traditional idea that there exists a fixed correspondence. Between territories, and languages spoken. And these contexts, the communicative practices of people like Perveen. Must be understood far beyond an alternation between two language. Language one and language two. Understanding the territories are not uniform places has in recent decades. Prompted a revision of the concept of language. Language is no longer understood as a system of closed linguistic structures. From the new perspectives, what is important is communication. Understood as a social practice, and constant transformation. And what is considered important and analysed is how individuals try to create, meaning using all the communicative repertoires. Traditional approaches represent languages as separate, and conceding elements of a territory. They are, what are defined as named languages, English, Spanish, German, etc. But today, sociolinguists question this approach. They insist on the universal character of language as a human attribute. But discard the closed value traditionally given to these languages. Otheguy, Garcia, and Reid explained it as follows. And then language cannot be defined linguistically, cannot be defined that is in grammatical, lexical, or structural terms. And because the named language cannot be defined linguistically, it is not strictly speaking a linguistic object. It is not something that a person speaks. So, the new approach is address the linguistic process rather than the linguistic element. What people do when they speak, rather than what languages are. And they understand language as a deeply personal and social affair. Our communicative practices are not the sum of different closed linguistic structures. The named languages, but more fluid, dynamic, personal and social processes. This dynamic and fluid process is what approaches, such as the paralegal approach seek to capture. But these new approaches also make us review. How we understand the communication practices of the population that has experienced high levels of mobility. Often the practices of refugees and migrants students, are judged from a deficit perspective. Taking as a reference the absolute mastery, of an ideal language speaker. Sociolinguists such as young Blommaert. Speak of the communicative repertoires of people, with mobility as truncated repertoires. Repertoires, that are formed from resources that are identified with different languages. Language that cannot be defined as first or second. All of these language belong to the speaker, and make up his or her repertoire. Having a truncated repertoire, does not exactly reflect our communicative competence. But our biography, our contact with languages. On the other hand, there's no such thing as a perfect speaker. Blommaert warns against the fallacy of equating the resources of a language with the resources of a speaker. And refutes the idea that a native speaker as a perfect speaker, by claiming paschal competence. It doesn't necessary to consider, what other social factors intervene when assessing the competence of a speaker. The non-native English academic, who can communicate at a conference with other experts in his field. Maybe unable to follow a conversation about football in a bar, in a Northern English town. His competence is also partial. But as legative seeming as a competent speaker, does not come from mastering all the interactive situations of a language. But from a status, prior to the interaction. In some way, we judge people's language competence even before they speak. Just because of the status they have. It is for this reason that a new approach such as plurilingual approach, does not focus on the languages. But on the competence of the speaker using different resources of different languages. The Council of Europe defines plurilingualism as, the ability to use languages for the purposes of communication. And to take part in intercultural interaction, where a person viewed as a social agent has a proficiency. Of varying degrees in several languages and experience of several cultures. This is not seen as the superposition, or juxtaposition of distinct competences. But rather, as the existence of a complex or even composite competence on which the user may draw. To embrace this approach, means to really question the classic way of interpretating the competence of somebody. To speak a new language, by constantly comparing his or her linguistic practices. To this idea native speaker we talked about. Another important concept, which has gained a lot of popularity recently is the translanguaging. Which understands communication as a verb. As a practice, and how people exposed to different languages make sense of their own world and communicate. To finish the session, let's keep in mind Ofelia Garcia's words. Translanguaging is the act performed by bilinguals of accessing different linguistic features. Or various models of what are described as autonomous languages, in order to maximize communicative potential. It is an approach to bilingualism that is centered, not on languages as has often been the case. But on the practices of building worlds that are readily observable in order to make sense of the multilingual words. Bilingual or multilingual speakers, do not necessarily master all the languages. What they master is communicative competence. And people like Perveen may need to develop some languages more, or less depending on the moment of time. But we need to understand the richness and complexities of her communicative practices. We also need to emphasize the acquisition of the receiving languages is a right, and not an obligation. Let's now reflect on the concepts presented in the session through the following questions. First, analyze your own linguistic repertoire. How many languages do you combine in your linguistic practices? Second, analyze the linguistic landscape of your neighborhood. How many languages do you think coexist, even in different degrees? If you look at labels, posters, signs, or notices in your neighborhood. You're going to see that your context is probably also not monolingual at all. Give some examples. And third, can you think of an activity that would allow you to work with the different linguistic repertoires of the students? And finally, fourth, imagine that you want to promote plurilingualism or translanguaging among your students in the classroom. How would you justify this to a teaching team that is reluctant to let students use their home languages? [MUSIC]
