Beyond the micro–macro interface in language and identity research

Abstract

The fields of applied linguistics and sociolinguistics developed in the 1960s, at a time when generative linguistics was prominent and linguistic research tended to conceptualise language in a formulaic way. Juxtaposed to this view, research in applied linguistics and sociolinguistics regards language as part and parcel of social life and accordingly has drawn on cognate work in the social sciences, including in particular sociology, anthropology, psychology and education studies. Research in applied linguistics was driven by the goal of finding solutions to real world problems in which language was considered to be a central issue (perceived or real) (Brumfit 1995); initially this focused largely on language policy and planning, second and foreign language education and language in the workplace. In this way, applied linguistics was cast as complementary to theoretical linguistics. With the boom in identity studies in the 1970s and 80s, work in applied linguistics sought to explore the interface between language and identity and the scope of applied linguistic research broadened. In the 1990s, this research increasingly took on a critical orientation that drew upon social theory and sociological insights (e.g. Pennycook 2001; Tollefson 2001; Block 2003), thus dovetailing even more closely with the field of sociolinguistics (Coupland et al. 2001). This research raised the issues of power, access and (in)equality. The subsequent focus on the interface between language, identity and power in applied linguistics and sociolinguistics has served as an impetus for researchers to grapple with links between micro and macro levels of language use, which are often cast respectively as interactional patterns or language choice and regulatory mechanisms or language policy. In this vein, reference to the micro-macro continuum in applied linguistics has the potential to serve as an analytical device, in that it can orient the focus of research towards interactional discourse, individual actions and speech-events on the one hand, or towards institutions and social structures on the other (Wortham 2012: 129). In other social sciences, the micro and macro levels of social life are similarly conceptualised as an analytical continuum consisting of a range of small to large-scale phenomena. Definitions vary according to the theory, approach and outlook. In the simplest and most fundamental terms in sociology, the micro level is considered to be that which relates to the individual, whereasthe macro level concerns structured organisations. These group dynamics, which are essential to understanding the construction and negotiation of identities, are located between the two end points of the micro-macro continuum. Tickameyer and Li (2000: 1703) state that micro-level research focuses on ‘individual thought, action, and interaction, often coinciding with socialpsychological theories and models’, while macro-level research deals with ‘social structures and those forces that organize as well as divide individuals into political, social or religious organizations, ethnic populations, communities, and nation-states’. In terms of approaches, there are two key sociological paradigms: ‘symbolic interactionism’ and ‘structural functionalism’; the former is generally considered to be more micro-oriented, while the latter is regarded as macro-oriented. The issue of how to conduct comprehensive research that bridges the micro and macro levels of social life has been flagged up as a key concern in the social sciences, in particular over the last three decades. The aim of this chapter is to evaluate the relevance and usefulness in applying a micro-macro framework to research on language and identity, with a focus on sociological, social theoretical and sociolinguistic trends that have shaped these debates. Particular consideration will be given to the fact that the predominantly discourse-based approaches to identity research go beyond strict compartmentalisation into one or the other conceptual sphere, ultimately leading to the issue of whether a micro-macro dichotomy is a suitable analytical device for research in applied linguistics that specifically focuses on the interface between language and identity. In light of the aforementioned influence of social theory and sociology on research in applied linguistics and sociolinguistics, the following section will present an overview of leading approaches to this issue in sociology, including parallel discussions on agency and structure, and how they have been applied explicitly to research on language and identity. Following this, there will be a discussion of selected studies in applied linguistics and sociolinguistics that have grappled with the relationship between the micro and macro, in particular those that examine in some detail the relationship between language practices and policies; language and context; and/or agency and structure. The final section will sum up key points and highlight points for future language and identity research in applied linguistics.