Exploring linguistic and cultural diversity at EMI universities in Kuwait

Translingualism—as theorized in linguistics, English-language instruction, and college writing pedagogy—dramatically shifts the way we view language use and development. It engages us in a deeper analysis of how users produce meaning, which resources they draw from, and how they deviate from or use conventions of writing. Written communication is seen as a translation process involving both writers and audience, for translingualism shifts our focus from language to language user, thereby valuing the agency of writers. Finally, it brings to light the asymmetrical relations of power in language use. More importantly, translingualism fundamentally recognizes that languages are always in contact and mutually influencing each other rather than being static, separated, and fixed; language use is a dynamic social process of negotiation and renegotiation and translation in which users, conventions, and contexts are continually changing (Canagarajah 2013b, 6). While translingualism applies to the qualities and characteristics of many languages, the main focus has been on English or rather Englishes, for it recognizes the various forms of World Englishes, as theorized by Braj Kachru (2017).Ariel Dorfman's writings are also useful for understanding translingualism. Dorfman sees the globalization of English as a “mongrelization that inevitably comes when transnational people breed bodies and syllables” (2002, 93). Dorfman recognizes how English is, indeed, transformed by its users in a continually flowing dynamic process that contrasts its static, monolithic status, which characterizes a monolingual orientation. Reflecting on his own bilingual journey, Dorfman reveals tensions between the dualistic concept of the divided self and that of the hybridized diasporic subject (93). Gloria Anzaldúa's (1999, 2002) work also transforms the divided self with a new mestiza consciousness and new approach to language that arises in the space between borders. Suresh Canagarajah's prolific work on translingual practices, Dorfman's concept of hybridity, and Anzaldúa's new mestiza consciousness can re-envision the ways in which we understand Italian American texts, and they provide the theoretical focus of this essay.Over the past decade, college writing professionals have urged their colleagues to adopt a translingual approach in their writing classrooms as a way of understanding and treating language difference (Horner et al. 2011). This approach recognizes that “the formation and definition of languages and language varieties are fluid” and should be viewed as “resources to be preserved, developed, and utilized,” not viewed as interference, substandard, or deficient (304). It asks what “writers are doing with language and why” not which language is standard, as it recognizes the many variations of English and other languages, the “global” or “world Englishes” (306). In sum, this approach encourages us to honor “the power of all language users to shape language to specific ends,” to recognize “the linguistic heterogeneity” of language users, and to interrogate monolingualist expectations (305).Suresh A. Canagarajah has written extensively on translingual practices that represent a paradigm shift for our understanding of communicative practices. Drawing on Jan Blommaert's work, which inaugurated the sociolinguistics of globalization, Canagarajah conceptualizes language in terms of its globalization and views it as mobile. As Blommaert explains, “Language varieties, texts, images travel across time and space, and . . . this is a journey across repertoires and sets of indexicalities attached to ingredients of repertoires” (2003, 611). One's linguistic repertoire, whether with one language or more, encompasses all its varieties, including its dialects, styles, and accents, yet these forms reflect inequality (612). Such inequality is seen in “dominant” languages or the ideology of Standard English or any attempt at standardization and the devaluation of local dialects or negative views of accents, views associated with a monolingual orientation. A monolingual orientation considers a language as homogenous and pure; it is decontextualized from cultural, social, or environmental influences. In such an orientation, language users are also immobile and limited to their community. The process of languages becoming codified and standardized coincided with nation-building.1In contrast, with a translingual orientation, languages are not conceptualized with labels, for such an act separates languages and enshrines them with unequal value; labels mask their mutual influence and integration. The influence of one language on another can be inventive and imaginative and not necessarily an interference. Canagarajah explains further, “Though language patterns (in the form of dialects, registers, and genres) and grammatical norms do evolve from local language practices sedimented over time, they are always open to renegotiation and reconstruction as users engage with new communicative contexts” (2013b, 7). Canagarajah's case studies of migrant language users confirm that users “treat all available codes as a repertoire in their everyday communication” (6). Most importantly, users construct meaning from multiple modalities and semiotic resources. Thus, for Canagarajah, the paradigm shift depends upon the principal concepts that “communication transcends individual languages” and that “communication transcends words and involves diverse semiotic resources and ecological affordances” (6). Translingualism captures language as it evolves, created and re-created by user and receptors, particularly the diasporic subject, in contrast to a monolingualist view of language as a fixed standard, located outside of its users (6).Ariel Dorfman also critiques the monolingual orientation and envisions a multilingual world in his work. In “The Nomads of Language,” he dismisses the “monolingual option” of learning or rejecting a new language that is presented to migrants when crossing borders (2002, 91). Instead, Dorfman encourages “migrants and the states in which they dwell to embark fully and without fear upon the adventure of being bilingual, and ask them also to celebrate, as so many of the young do, the many intermediate tongues (condescendingly termed patois) that prosper in the spaces between established linguistic systems, the myriad creole zones of confluence where languages can mix and experiment and express the fluctuating frontiers of a mingled humanity” (91). Dorfman encourages multilingualism “as a real alternative,” especially in the context of our new globalized world with its constant motion and flux (92). Dorfman's description of the history of languages compares to translingual practices: “Languages . . . have themselves always been maddeningly migrant, borrowing from here and there and everywhere . . . taking words out on loan and returning them in different, wonderfully twisted and often funny guises, pawning these words, stealing them, renting them out, eating them, making love to them, and spawning splendidly unrecognizable children” (93). Dorfman celebrates the translingual view of languages that meet at the border.It took Dorfman almost his whole life to arrive at these insights about language. In his literacy autobiography, Heading South, Looking North (1998), he documents a life tormented by his bicultural identity: born in Argentina, exiled to the United States, exiled to Chile, resettled in the United States. Dorfman attempted “to escape the bifurcation of tongue and vocabulary” as he decisively moved from Spanish to English, English to Spanish, from American to South American (2002, 92). He attempts to resolve his dichotomy at one point by living in Chile, speaking Spanish, but writing in English.But he could not resolve his tormented duality until he extricated himself from a monolingual orientation: “For me—resident of this dual existence, married to two tongues, inhabited by English and Spanish in equal measure, in love with them both now that they have called a truce for my throat—the distress of being double and somewhat homeless is overshadowed by the glory of being hybrid and open” (2002, 91). To celebrate the “glory of being hybrid and open,” and move toward translingualism, Dorfman must disable his use of “divided worlds.”The metaphor of divided worlds captures the socio-psychological impact of conflict experienced by those who move from one locus to another. It is often employed by those who move from home to school, from a native country to America, from working-class homes to university, from Black worlds to white worlds, from straight to queer. While the binary appears reductive, it is an almost universal metaphor in numerous autobiographical poems, plays, short stories, novels, and contemporary cinema, particularly when used by those with immigrant or minority cultural identities. It is also visible in the contentiousness of the hyphenated American. And though many writers employ this metaphor, it almost always implies multiplicity. The binary implied in divided worlds is constructed from a monolingual orientation, and one cannot move toward reconciliation without its dismantling. Further, as I will show, Gloria Anzaldúa's theory of mestiza consciousness redirects our focus to the space between these worlds. From this position we can interrogate the binary.Dorfman can disable the divided-worlds trope because his life experience belies their static construction. For one, his movement across borders, however dichotomized as north and south, makes him transnational and a “diasporic subject” (McClennen 2005, 171). Sophia A. McClennen claims that while it is obvious that Dorfman's multiple exiles and his family's legacy of “forced migrations” as Russian Jews characterize his experience as diasporic, they also frame his expression of self-identity. Yet she provides only a brief analysis of the etymology of diaspora in which “‘speirein’ means ‘to sow or scatter’” to indicate “the intricate ways that Dorfman's text layers subjectivity” (171). McClennen posits that “scattering suggests the polyvalent self and, on the other hand, sowing suggests the binary tension between the attributes found in the seed and those found in the land” (171). McClennen's understanding of the diasporic subject, within the context of life writing, helps us see the complexities of identity formation, from divided to diasporic; however, a deeper understanding of the diasporic subject is needed.Robin Cohen's scholarship on global diasporas provides a comprehensive description of the common features of a diaspora, despite the many variations in historical experiences. Such features include “dispersal from an original homeland, often traumatically, to two or more foreign regions” (1997, 26). Key to diasporic communities is the “collective memory and myth about the homeland” in addition to “an idealization of the putative ancestral home and a collective commitment to its maintenance, restoration, safety and prosperity, even to its creation” and “a strong ethnic group consciousness sustained over a long time” (26). Cohen's typology includes victim, labor, trade, and imperial diasporas. Donna Gabaccia draws on Cohen's work to delineate a broad historical account of “Italy's many diasporas,” reminding us that migrants from Italy left an impact on the places to which they migrated (2000, 10). Gabaccia informs us that those migrants were primarily low-wage workers who supplied the ever-expanding demand for labor in the global labor market of the nineteenth century (2000, 59). With the high rate of return to Italy, these workers embarked on a “transnational way of life” in which family economies were constructed across borders to achieve stability and American customs and ideas seeped into their villages (2000, 82). Gabaccia concludes that for Italians, “home” is always a place that can be anywhere (191). Similarly, Cohen acknowledges postmodern understandings of diaspora that view the “collective identity of homeland and nation [as] a vibrant and constantly changing set of cultural interactions that fundamentally question the very ideas of ‘home’ and ‘host’” (1997, 127).Consequently, Cohen proposes that the definition of diaspora be loosened to accommodate these new identities and subjectivities that can be encompassed with the term “cultural diasporas” (1997, 128). Cohen's recognition that “diasporas are positioned somewhere between nation-states and ‘travelling cultures’ in that they involve dwelling in a nation-state in a physical sense, but travelling in an astral or spiritual sense that falls outside the nation-state's space/time zone” connects to Dorfman's ever-shifting physical and psychosocial identities (135–136). Indeed, Dorfman forces us to examine both the artificiality of national borders and also how those borders become embedded in one's consciousness. Further, Dorfman relies on his writing and political activity to creatively construct his national identity, thus asserting his autonomy. He clearly illustrates the limits of monolingualism and its problematic enactment of separation and division, the main causes of his destabilization. His final acceptance of his hybridity stabilizes him; such hybridity parallels translingual practices.Dorfman performs hybridity and translingual practices throughout his literacy narrative. Though Dorfman uses English, Spanish phrases abound, always italicized: “This is the last time I will ever see him, the last story I will ever tell him, la última vez” (1998, 12). We witness translingual practice in a retelling of a scene from his mother's childhood, when classmates refuse to let her in the music room, and his mother hears “No podés . . . porque sos judia,” which he informs us means, “You can't open the door, because you're a Jew” (16). When young “Edward” takes Spanish at the British school, he is forced to say, “‘Hablo este idioma en forma execrable,’ I speak this language execrably” (111). Usually when his memory takes him to Argentina or Chile, he uses more Spanish phrases. Unlike Anzaldúa, who purposefully refuses to translate her various forms of Spanish in order to deny the dominating power of English, Dorfman almost always translates.While some may refer to this use of multiple languages as “code switching,” it is now more clearly understood, through translingual practices, as “code meshing.” As college English educator Russell Durst has pointed out, the “progressive-seeming concept of code-switching actually favors the dominant group, because users of minority language forms are asked to switch to Standard English in formal or professional discourse, while users of the Standard need never code switch” (2014, 65). In contrast, Canagarajah's definition of code meshing is “a form of writing in which multilinguals merge their diverse language resources with the dominant genre conventions to construct hybrid texts for voice” (2013a, 40). Thus, it would be more accurate to understand one's use of multiple repertoires and/or multiple languages as dynamic, translingual interchanges. Dorfman captures this process not only to reflect on his “bilingual journey” but also to show a peaceful path toward negotiated hybridity as a cultural diasporic subject.For Dorfman, the metaphor of borders, whether national or personal, is essential to understanding his life narrative. He deconstructs these borders, exhibiting the fluidity of identity in a postmodern world. Perhaps, as Gloria Anzaldúa envisions with her mestiza consciousness, Dorfman's divided self creates a space in which to move toward a more expansive consciousness that incorporates the multicultural, multilingual, “half and half” (Anzaldúa 1999, 41). For although Anzaldúa claims her duality as Mexican and American, this divided construction leads her to articulate multiple subjectivities: Tejana, Chicana, indigena. Anzaldúa's mestiza consciousness and her paths toward higher consciousness envision a holistic self to heal the divisions, and this is what Dorfman was finally able to achieve. Dorfman, too, is always aware of the layers of subjectivities that exist within himself. Further, like Anzaldúa, Dorfman believes in the power of language to incite and transform others.Like Dorfman, Anzaldúa draws on an expansive linguistic repertoire; she actively expresses eight languages throughout her book that are used in various contexts, including Standard English, working-class and slang English, Standard Spanish, Standard Mexican Spanish, North Mexican Spanish dialect, Chicano Spanish (which has regional variations), Tex-Mex, and Pachuco or caló (1999, 77). Her use of multiple languages progresses her new mestiza project, for this consciousness requires recognition of its multiple subjectivities. With her belief that “ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity—I am my language,” she cannot feel pride or legitimacy in herself until her languages also have those qualities (81). It would not be achieved until she is “free to write bilingually and to switch codes without having always to translate” and to use Spanglish instead of being forced to use English or Spanish; she anticipates a time when English speakers will accommodate her (81). Anyone who reads Borderlands/La Frontera can see how she has accomplished just that with her code meshing.Similar to Dorfman, Anzaldúa moves from divided to multiple: Her “divided self” empowers her with double perspectives that transform and create new identities, such as mestiza, but also with new ways of seeing. The divided nature of Chicano experience illustrates the problem of naming these identities: “Nosotros the one of we are constantly to the Spanish of the on the other we the so that we our (Anzaldúa 1999, of the in naming is the of “This makes for a of dual . . . We are a of two with various of or It is the conflict of the creates the as a her experience and that of the new mestiza consciousness. This consciousness multiple subjectivities as we see in this that appears in a A of a out of one into I am in all at the la (Anzaldúa 1999, with the duality of her experience but concludes with as Anzaldúa between two As we see in the final of the am by all the that create the self with that may to and states of which Anzaldúa characterizes as “a of (1999, Anzaldúa a new consciousness in order to from the to “a for the new mestiza This new consciousness duality . . . the that in the very of our our our languages, our believes it can and even the new mestiza must “a new story to our world and our in a new with images and that us to each other and to the Anzaldúa's new mestiza consciousness requires a which she throughout Borderlands/La the metaphor of crossing a to how this new consciousness explains, “The between the world just left and the one is both a and point of a a (2002, is essential to the self and this new Anzaldúa explains that is an journey home to the to the is the until there is a time when are Anzaldúa the space between divided worlds as the locus of For this I to the space open between Italian and American to the and of though I the meaning of the in their from Italy to America, of a that transformed them and divided them, even they who a linguistic identity, “a way of speaking and writing as an Italian though it was an identity born from 1999, how were from the mother the language that been as the and language of Italian the language of the of and of the that . . . original from Italian was by a linguistic their within their new mother broad provide a for a more and understanding of how the dialects the over were or as we see in the of and in the We also see how the space between Italian and American new linguistic identities and thus how the of language use established by Canagarajah, Dorfman, and Anzaldúa can transform our understanding of Italian American languages and in Italian American studies have the as Italian diaspora which acknowledges the impact of Italian on other as as the impact of those who to Italy As and point out, Italy has become a country of and this makes a in our understanding of what it means to feel and Italian and everyday life is changing our 7). Such can be seen in social, cultural, and linguistic a point of Italian is new to born and in foreign Italian language is changing and is by the of other the and that very process and Thus, translingual practices can our understanding of Italian diaspora of the scholarship on Italian American languages of translingual practices. who provides one of the of how it as a everyday language of within the at work, and its in as as the and it as a mix of Italian words, dialect, and It often but borrowing from English so it is viewed as Though acknowledges this negative view Italians, who it as a of their he also that some it as “an and a Further, a concept of languages often with mutual his that the language of Italian a of to produce a form of which in the of language This of linguistic confluence as Canagarajah monolingual and of linguistic Yet that is a in in the Italian there was a need for a common linguistic a a Italian This has been a in language from one or more languages and may be used as a or common language. to the nature of language these linguistic varieties to For a creole from a it the native language of a or its the as their language out that languages “as the and one of its established languages and takes over the of the as the (2000, to this is what to With the of and immigrant the World the to long it a of development. final are to be found within the In those where the was from to their it was in a a than as a means of the its it was by the very that it and was by a working-class American English only of the and it As English the dominant language of Italian their dialects, or their hybrid languages into While Italian to recognize that their immigrant language created an to and political and the of English, as other studies show that they not their hybrid one of the on Italian American language varieties, the of linguistic varieties in in the by the and of from In one linguistic varieties in Italian American primarily in that we will see in some Italian American dialect, often in a form that is found in the of between two or more of a or Standard of a them as dialect, American Italian and this to whether Italian American languages as or some other linguistic as they have features found in almost all of For the of my own work, to these of studies on Italian American language varieties and to understand them from the of a translingual For the of English and Italian dialects or English as which a translingual orientation would see as the mutual of semiotic one linguistic not include in his because of its negative a and its yet it to Italian American language more while translingual the which when with languages in their It was in by the who of form and to an Italian in his of which has been as as his to the Italian than the binary between high and sees language as a way to the hybridity of “The term a of in which the moves through languages to create a multilingual and In other words, one not switch from language to one uses them all at in two or more languages are in the of one of the languages the native definition with a translingual particularly for all forms of as resources and not as Further, she provides that for of were multilingual and not monolingual In she the historical shift from throughout the world to

This chapter discusses how EMI (English-Medium Instruction) in higher education may help students to learn skills in EIL (English as an International Language), or global Englishes beyond the Anglophone frame of reference, by examining four actual university classes in Japan as a case study from East Asia. When EMI is now in vogue at many Japanese universities driven by the urge for globalization, it is clear that the “English” needed for those EMI courses is EIL, which may be also redefined as ELF (English as a Lingua Franca), rather than conventional Anglo-American English confined within native speaker norms. Drawing on action research, observations, questionnaires, and interviews for the four EMI classes, the present chapter argues that EMI in higher education can be significant for the concurrent learning of content and EIL (which the author terms CELFIL: Content and English as a Lingua Franca Integrated Learning), though in different ways depending on varied factors in each EMI course. While classes with a diversity of international and local students provide an optimal environment where interactive skills in EIL may be acquired in authentic situations, even those consisting only of domestic students can be useful for the learning of EIL if the instructors’ English serves as models of EIL.

Purpose This study aims to explore the perceptions of faculty members at Kuwait University from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds regarding using adaptive learning systems to enhance educational innovation. Design/methodology/approach This study was based on the Cultural Adaptation Theory to analyze the behaviors of 12 faculty members at Kuwait University. This study adopted a qualitative approach, with data collected through direct interviews and analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings This study revealed that cultural diversity, language barriers, resistance to change and lack of training were key factors hindering the effective use of adaptive learning systems. This study also showed that some faculty members resist these systems due to their cultural differences and previous educational experiences. Practical implications It is recommended to offer specialized training programs to help faculty adapt to the adaptive learning environment, with a focus on institutional support for innovation and consideration of cultural and linguistic diversity. Continuous professional development should also be promoted to aid in effective system integration. Originality/value This study emphasizes the need to assess how cultural diversity affects the use of adaptive learning systems in Arab universities, contributing to the creation of educational strategies that support innovation while aligning with various cultural contexts.

This study explored how cultural, linguistic, and gender diversity among teachers influence inclusive learning outcomes in Sokoto State, Nigeria. Using a quasi- experimental design, 332 SSII students and eight teachers across four schools participated. Data were collected using pre- and post-tests in English and Mathematics, and analyzed with independent t-tests and regression analysis. Results revealed no significant gender differences in student performance (p > 0.05). However, cultural diversity (β = 0.41, p < 0.01) and linguistic diversity (β = 0.36, p < 0.01) significantly predicted student achievement. The study concludes that cultural and linguistic diversity foster inclusive learning environments.

Culturally diverse expert teams have yet to bring comprehensive linguistic diversity to intergovernmental ecosystem assessments

This article presents English-medium instruction (EMI) in higher education (HE) from a language policy and planning (LPP) perspective. Based on a review of EMI policy research in diverse higher education contexts, we address several key contemporary policy tensions in EMI such as English native-speakerism, English monolingualism, and language education with attention to corpus, status and acquisition planning as well as the role of individual policy actors. In light of this review, we argue for an orientation to policymaking for EMI-HE institutions that acknowledges the value of individuals as policy arbiters and aligns institutional goals with “on the ground” needs and practices. We also point to areas of future research that would benefit all EMI stakeholders, in particular critical engagement with the nature of language competence in EMI settings and the enhanced development of evidence-based EMI learning outcomes. Finally, we propose an ecological framework for EMI-HE policy development that could be employed as a heuristic to guide universities in designing concrete EMI policies for their local contexts. As an extension, we also offer an inventory of reflective questions to guide key university stakeholders in effectively engaging in EMI policy processes.

This article reports the results of a school-based curriculum development project that aimed to support language teachers working with culturally and linguistically diverse student populations in Norway to develop teaching strategies that foster intercultural citizenship and multilingual competence. Three university researchers collaborated with two schools to increase mutual respect and tolerance for cultural and linguistic diversity in language classrooms, to increase awareness of the positive impact of home language maintenance on academic performance, and to improve the engagement of multilingual literacy and student identity in the classroom. Data were collected during teacher workshops and while following the delivery of the project, and consist of lesson planning materials, texts produced by students, and a follow-up teacher survey. The article presents examples of activities and materials the teachers at the cooperating schools designed and implemented, samples of student work, as well as teacher reflections on the extent to which the project promoted multiliteracy and intercultural citizenship. The findings suggest that while the project helped strengthen awareness of cultural and linguistic diversity at the schools, understanding of the relevance of the home language to literacy development and academic success and multiliteracy were not adequately supported. Implications for future work to promote language classrooms that foster linguistic and cultural diversity and multiliteracy are discussed.

The study focuses on the issue of preserving and maintaining the cultural and linguistic diversity of the EU and presents a possible way to utilize the tools of regional development planning for such purposes. The issue is of relevance for many reasons. Most importantly, the founding Treaties of the EU contain obligations of the Union to uphold its linguistic and cultural diversity. Additionally, maintaining this diversity is a crucial part of the human rights-based approach to sustainable development and as such forms an integral part of the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. The study first discusses why linguistic and cultural diversity is important from the point of view of sustainable development. It then presents the case study of Szeklerland in Romania as an illustrative example of how such diversity is under threat and concludes with a discussion on a possible way the EU can foster the preservation of its rich linguistic diversity through its regional development policy planning.KeywordsCultural diversitySocial cohesionRegional development policyHuman rightsSustainable developmentEU

Purpose This study reports on the development of an auditory passage comprehension task for Swedish primary school children of cultural and linguistic diversity. It also reports on their performance on the task in quiet and in noise. Method Eighty-eight children aged 7-9 years and showing normal hearing participated. The children were divided into three groups based on presumed language exposure: 13 children were categorized as Swedish-speaking monolinguals, 19 children were categorized as simultaneous bilinguals, and 56 children were categorized as sequential bilinguals. No significant difference in working memory capacity was seen between the three language groups. Two passages and associated multiple-choice questions were developed. During development of the passage comprehension task, steps were taken to reduce the impact of culture-specific prior experience and knowledge on performance. This was achieved by using the story grammar principles, universal topics and plots, and simple language that avoided complex or unusual grammatical structures and words. Results The findings indicate no significant difference between the two passages and similar response distributions. Passage comprehension performance was significantly better in quiet than in noise, regardless of language exposure group. The monolinguals outperformed both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals in both listening conditions. Conclusions Because the task was designed to minimize the effect of cultural knowledge on auditory passage comprehension, this suggests that compared with monolinguals, both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals have a disadvantage in auditory passage comprehension. As expected, the findings demonstrate that noise has a negative effect on auditory passage comprehension. The magnitude of this effect does not relate to language exposure. The developed auditory passage comprehension task seems suitable for assessing auditory passage comprehension in primary school children of linguistic and cultural diversity.

Purpose- This research aims to explore the impact of highly advanced technology in reducing cross-cultural language conflicts, especially in Indonesia, which boasts rich linguistic and cultural diversity. Information technology has significant potential to serve as a catalyst in mitigating language conflicts amid the cultural and linguistic diversity in Indonesia. Design/Methodology/Approach- The research employs a descriptive-analytical literature review method, which highlights various relevant theories supporting an understanding of how technology can play a crucial role in dampening language conflicts. Data collection from literature reviewed by several researchers is conducted to gain a profound understanding of the impact of information technology in mitigating language conflicts among different language and cultural groups. Findings- The findings indicate that information technology serves not only as a tool to reduce conflicts among groups with different linguistic and cultural backgrounds but also as a facilitator in building intercultural and interreligious communication. By exploring digital solutions, it is evident that technology plays a significant role in deepening cross-cultural understanding and strengthening inter-country relationships. With technological advancements, it is expected that these solutions will continue to innovate and contribute to creating a more inclusive and mutually understanding society amidst the linguistic and cultural diversity in Indonesia. Research Limitation/Implications- This research is still in the theoretical realm and does not involve field testing as a comparative method. Nevertheless, this study can be considered as a preliminary step in exploring the role of rapidly developing technology in addressing language conflict issues.

This study utilizes questionnaires, interviews, and universities’ web content and strategy documents to investigate the reasons behind the rise of English‐medium instruction in Türkiye's higher education and its implications for intercultural communication. It identifies students’ motives for choosing Türkiye, such as educational quality, cultural ties, and affordability, and universities’ aim to enhance their internationalization, linguistic and cultural diversity, reputation, and financial standing. Analysis of web pages shows that while introducing “Turkish culture,” universities often adopt an essentialist perspective that involves making nation‐level generalizations, which may risk perpetuating stereotypes. Analysis of the internationalization strategies reveals an emphasis on English for internationalization and frequent references to values and attitudes toward cultural diversity but little to no emphasis on intercultural skills and critical understanding. Universities are employing diverse efforts to attract international students, but there remains potential for more comprehensive strategies to cultivate intercultural competence.

Protocol for a scoping review of the collection, analysis and reporting of variables related to cultural and linguistic diversity in dementia clinical trials and cohort studies

Linguistic diversity is a common phenomenon in urban Nepalese societies. However, Nepalese educational system has not adapted this reality very well. Therefore, considering the linguistic landscape of the multilingual city in Kathmandu, this study focuses on the linguistic and cultural diversity in multilingual school space of public education system. The purpose of this study was to explore how the English language teachers address the issue of students’ linguistic diversity in English as a medium of instruction (EMI) language policy classrooms, whether they take this as a challenge of teaching or chance for learning. Employing a phenomenological design of qualitative research, three English language teachers were interviewed to collect information for this study. Their audio recorded interviews were transcribed, coded and then analyzed and interpreted using a thematic approach linking with relevant theories. The findings indicate that linguistic diversity in the English classrooms can be a valuable resource for learning and developing effective intercultural competence in the learners to cope with culturally diverse social contexts. Though linguistic diversity has become a challenge of teaching for English language teachers, it can be changed into an opportunity for learning through intercultural awareness. EMI language policy of public schools has become a barrier to change multilingualism as a resource for learning.

English Medium Instruction (EMI) consists in delivering content in English to students who are non-native speakers of English. With English becoming a supranational and intercultural tool of professional and academic communication, EMI is being introduced by various entities in higher education at a rapid pace in different parts of the world. The focal point of the present research on EMI is the collection of data provided by teachers and students regarding their attitudes toward EMI. Along with the immediate spread, numerous doubts have emerged that need to be addressed in order to render EMI more effective and accessible. This paper presents the current literature on the subject of EMI in higher education, where it is primarily present, and aims to recognize and provide an overview of the challenges that teachers and students face in education in which EMI is incorporated. The challenges may be identified in three main areas, that is at the level of policy and social processes, at the level of teacher’s agency, and finally at the level of students’ perspective. Some of the challenges may be fixed with basic policy changes; however, others, such as the factor of translanguaging, the methodology of establishing linguistic standards, or the process of transition between particular stages of education, require more research into the subject of EMI.

As the world grows less biologically diverse, it is becoming less linguistically and culturally diverse as well. Biologists estimate annual loss of species at 1,000 times or more greater than historic rates, and linguists predict that 50-90% of the world's languages will disappear by the end of this century. Prior studies indicate similarities in the geographic arrangement of biological and linguistic diversity, although conclusions have often been constrained by use of data with limited spatial precision. Here we use greatly improved datasets to explore the co-occurrence of linguistic and biological diversity in regions containing many of the Earth's remaining species: biodiversity hotspots and high biodiversity wilderness areas. Results indicate that these regions often contain considerable linguistic diversity, accounting for 70% of all languages on Earth. Moreover, the languages involved are frequently unique (endemic) to particular regions, with many facing extinction. Likely reasons for co-occurrence of linguistic and biological diversity are complex and appear to vary among localities, although strong geographic concordance between biological and linguistic diversity in many areas argues for some form of functional connection. Languages in high biodiversity regions also often co-occur with one or more specific conservation priorities, here defined as endangered species and protected areas, marking particular localities important for maintaining both forms of diversity. The results reported in this article provide a starting point for focused research exploring the relationship between biological and linguistic-cultural diversity, and for developing integrated strategies designed to conserve species and languages in regions rich in both.