Rejecting nativeness to produce a more accurate and just Linguistics

Abstract

Abstract: Both the concept of native speaker/signer and the term itself have been widely critiqued across fields of language research. However, this term is still often used uncritically by linguists, with some disciplines centering the behavior and knowledge of native speakers as the main object of inquiry. We argue that the term native speaker/signer should not be treated as an objective analytic category. Instead, it is a language-ideological assemblage, a cluster of related language ideologies that assume essentialized relationships between linguistic practices and social identities. By valorizing normative modes of language learning and use, nativeness excludes already marginalized language users. Rather than simply avoiding the term or replacing it, we argue that linguists must interrogate the role of this concept and its associated theoretical baggage. We anticipate that moving away from nativeness and the ideas surrounding it will encourage linguists to account for the diverse linguistic repertoires held by all language users, force theoretical approaches to center nonnormative language use, and lead overall to a more accurate and just discipline.