This meaty volume explores challenging theoretical issues and some of the most controversial aspects of the concept of translanguaging. Brian King, the Book Review Editor, invited me to review it knowing I had reservations about a translanguaging approach to language learning, especially in indigenous contexts. A number of contributors provide chapters which greatly developed my understanding of the broader deconstructivist position adopted by those at the forefront of translanguaging theory (e.g. Ofelia García (Reference García2009) and Alastair Pennycook (Reference Pennycook and Ricento2006)), and many provide substantial evidence to contest that position. After reading this book, I realised that my reservations related to only a small area of this disputatious minefield. Some contributors also discuss the implications for sociolinguistics and applied linguistics in particular. Given the strict word limit I confine my comments in this review to chapters dealing with translanguaging from perspectives likely to be of most interest to Language in Society readers.
Jeff MacSwan's brief preface provides a succinct summary of the book's goals and contents, followed by his introductory chapter which elaborates, contextualising ‘the epistemological roots of deconstructivism’, and assessing ‘its promise as an approach to advocate for multilingual children and communities’ (xvii). This thorough, informative, and accessible account forcefully critiques the deconstructivist position which many advocates of translanguaging have adopted. As MacSwan notes, García (Reference García2009) initially treated translanguaging as an ‘umbrella term that included code-switching and other kinds of language contact’, but it gradually evolved ‘to take on a more radical competitive disposition towards traditional sociolinguistic research on multilingualism’ (4). The current extreme position holds that neither languages nor communities exist, thus ‘eliminating constructs like language rights, code-switching and multilingualism … linguistic communities, second language acquisition’ and—of direct interest to readers of Language in Society—‘much of the field of sociolinguistics’ (4).
MacSwan has assembled an impressive cast of contributors to support his critical stance and challenge this position. The book is dedicated to Vivian Cook who died in December 2021 after contributing chapter 2, ‘the final living instalment of [his] remarkable scholarly career’ (xix). Using a linguistics and SLA lens, Cook explores ‘how languages interact with each other within the multi-competence and translanguaging approaches’ (45). He sees it as primarily relating to minority speakers in multilingual contexts, but it was not always clear what he included in the concept. He returns to defining it many times as he ‘picks a path through a minefield of unresolved disputes and controversies’ (45). James Paul Gee‘s chapter then provides a valuable account of current research in experience coding and its relation to linguistic variation.
Part 2 provides insights into how these scholars view the relationship between code-switching and translanguaging. Gumperz’ pioneering work comes into focus in chapter 4 where MacSwan demonstrates the value of code-switching in advocating a multilingual perspective on language learning. He presents a thorough review of code-switching scholarship summarised in a useful table (85), which identifies research focussing on social and conversational aspects of language use vs. research that concentrates on language structure and the nature of bilingual grammar. He develops his argument in favour of a multilingual perspective, a position of ‘critical importance’ in advocating ‘an inclusive holistic approach to bilingualism in schools’ just as did code-switching research (87). He adopts a positively critical approach identifying areas where a translanguaging approach offers potential insights rather than emphasising conflict and disagreements. And he focuses on published research evidence in this endeavour rather than ‘conjecture’ (113), as he argues García and colleagues have done in what he judges as their unreasonable rejection of code-switching research.
Peter Auer examines the relationship between translanguaging multilingual practices and the notion of codes in chapter 5 and provides further sociolinguistic support for the position outlined by MacSwan, challenging the dismissal of code-switching as based on a misrepresentation of relevant research over the last four decades (128). He first examines the data provided by García and colleagues between 2009 and 2014, arguing that it does not support a deconstructivist position in relation to languages, but rather provides evidence to support a ‘classical code-switching’ position (140). He then examines a number of examples illustrating ‘bilingual practices that may come closer to what García and others have in mind when they talk about translanguaging as being different from code-switching (although they never mention them). These practices are not based on the distinctness of the codes but can, rather, lead to registers and varieties that have a hybrid composition but may function like monolingual codes’ (146). I find this analysis very interesting and convincing, and worth further research. Overall, Auer's chapter is rich in arguments with analyses of empirical data to support them. I cannot do it justice here, but it is highly relevant to those readers interested in a sociolinguist's evaluation of the writings of proponents of translanguaging.
In chapter 6, Rakesh M. Bhatt & Agnes Bolonyai tackle head-on the conflict between code-switching and translanguaging researchers, asking what new knowledge the theoretical construct of translanguaging (and associated terms) offer and what new empirical coverage they provide (155). Analysing examples of code-switching data, they conclude that it demonstrates strategic and skilful use of bilingual resources illustrating ‘the subtle and complex ways in which new indexical orders emerge … expressing agency, bilingual creativity and a new political economy’ (165). In contrast, their analysis of the translanguaging data offered by García and others concludes that translanguaging does not offer anything new, and ‘the claim that translanguaging does not involve two separate linguistic systems is untenable’ (170). They conclude by (re)claiming ‘the theoretical status of code-switching’, implying that the term translanguaging has been generated by the constant demands for new terminology.
Part 3, ‘Psycholinguistics’, includes a very well-documented and nuanced review by Fred Genesee of evidence from bilingual first language acquisition research to challenge the claim of translanguaging proponents that ‘named languages are not cognitively differentiated’ (183), and an interesting review by Rebecca A. Marks, Teresa Satterfield, & Ioulia Kovelman of research on bilingual reading development. The latter does not explicitly addresses the concept of translanguaging, though the conclusion similarly contests deconstructivist arguments.
Part 4, ‘Language policy’, opens with an impassioned and well supported argument from Sheilah E. Nicholas & Teresa L. McCarty for indigenous language rights, fuelled by rich material from a workshop for Native American language educators. They emphasise ‘the paramount value of relationality’ (228) and self-empowerment, repressed by colonialism. Again, translanguaging is not explicitly mentioned, but it is clear that their persuasive arguments are inconsistent with a deconstructivist perspective on language(s).
In the very substantial chapter 10, Terrence G. Wiley tackles the issue of immigration-fuelled racism and its cost in terms of the ‘steady erasure’ (248) of US bilingual education programs. He identifies Trump administrators as major accelerants of ideologies and policies opposing immigration, especially from Mexico and South America. Critiquing the ‘retreat’ from language rights in academia, he identifies the ‘outright rejection of the constructs of language, bilingualism and codeswitching’ (249) as responsible for fuelling this development. He then critically reviews an impressive amount of material involving a range of theoretical positions on their relevance to language policy. He ends with an entreaty for all scholars regardless of theoretical differences to unite in advocacy for social justice and ‘rights to linguistic and racial equality in education’ (285).
The final part on ‘Practice’ includes a chapter by Joanna McPake & Diane J. Tedick which most directly addresses my concerns: namely the issue of whether there is any evidence that a translanguaging approach is effective in supporting minority language speakers to attain fluent bilingualism. Using research on Gaelic-medium education in Scotland, they identify crucial questions and concerns, and conclude that there is an urgent need for ‘more robust empirical research to support the claims made by translanguaging proponents’ whose assertions have been based on flimsy anecdotal evidence.
Providing a radical critique of ‘liberal multiculturalism’ (323), Christian J. Faltis raises issue of hidden racism and argues that advocacy for multilingualism can be seen as a conduit to erasure of the languages and cultural practices of non-white students. Concepts like ‘linguistic imperialism’ and ‘eugenics-based language ideologies’ (331) take the discussion well into the realm of politics. Translanguaging and code-switching are both presented as positive strategies, but it is not clear where exactly Faltis stands in the deconstructivism debate. The same cannot be said of Stephen May's ‘Afterword’, which reviews the book's material to provide a stimulating attack on deconstructivist approaches to language switching and focuses especially on the damaging implications for language learning among indigenous communities. In the process, he develops convincing arguments aimed at forestalling the ‘ossification of translanguaging as (a new) pedagogical orthodoxy’ (345) and supporting the growth of ‘inter-transdisciplinarity’ (352).
Overall, this book provides a great deal of thought-provoking reading for sociolinguists. It illustrates the diverse sociocultural contexts in which multilingualism and bilingualism are located, albeit illustrated predominantly with examples from the US and the UK. And for those who, like me, considered translanguaging to be largely a pedagogical issue which had unfortunately leaked into theory and developed to challenge important and soundly based concepts like code-switching, this book makes it clear that the issues are much deeper and have more serious consequences. Finally, it is clear there is much more research needed to explore the claims on both sides of this debate, and that sociolinguistics has a great deal to offer in this area.
