(Trans)languaging-for-learning: A perspective from the South

Abstract

Background: While the concept of translanguaging has gained significant traction in education in multilingual contexts, it is also debated and contested. Claims are made about what translanguaging can and cannot do, how different it might be from code-switching, whether it arises from a single repertoire of language resources or from use of separate languages, and whether it is detrimental to or supportive of the development and inclusion of marginalised languages.Objectives: In this article we consider what these debates might mean in the South African context and how translanguaging might be different in South Africa with its particular racialised history of marginalisation of African languages. Drawing on epistemologies of the South, we align with the argument that there are multiple multilingualisms. We argue for (trans)languaging pedagogies that embrace both more fixed or monolingual uses of named languages as well as fluid, multilingual use of repertoires.Method: We will review early conceptualisations of translanguaging, showing how these are born out of different contexts as well as how translanguaging is taken up in South African research. We will draw on three examples of fixed and fluid pedagogical translanguaging to show what is possible within a South African classroom context.Results: The three examples show that (trans)languaging-for-learning goes beyond communicating bilingually in a classroom and involves planned meaning negotiation.Conclusion: In (trans)languaging-for-learning, the emphasis is on using one’s full linguistic and semiotic repertoire in order to develop and show understanding of learning, rather than to demonstrate mastery of the use of standard named languages.Contribution: The article expands translanguaging theory by theorising (trans)languaging-for-learning from a Southern perspective.