Abstract

In the past three decades, a body of research on issues related to multilingual scholars writing for publication has emerged, paralleling the rise of pressures on scholars around the world to publish their work in high-status journals, especially those included in particular journal citation indexes; these indexes typically privilege the use of English. Researchers have investigated multilingual scholars’ experiences and perspectives, the social contexts of their work, policies on research publishing, aspects of the texts produced by multilingual scholars, the kinds of people scholars interact with while working to publish their research, their collaborations and networks, and pedagogical initiatives to support their publishing efforts. Nevertheless, as ongoing research is conducted, the existing research base has not always been consulted in meaningful ways. In this paper, we draw on the notion of ‘lore’ to identify some of the preconceptions or received wisdom about multilingual scholars and their writing that seem to be circulating, then argue for researchers to move beyond the ‘lore’ and make greater use of both findings from empirical research and related theoretical and methodological conversations. We identify directions for future research to be conducted.

Highlights

  • Framing the ConcernIn the past 30 years, academics around the world have increasingly become subject to “evaluation regimes” [1] that quantify research output in multiple ways, often calibrated to high-status journal citation indexes such as those in the Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics)1 and driven, for example, by the global rush for university rankings [2]

  • The research base spans global geolinguistic locations, with work coming from the Anglophone “center”; bi/multilingual contexts such as French-speaking Canada [57]; and locations including Argentina [58]; China [59]; Egypt [60]; Iceland [61]; Japan [23,62]; Kazakhstan [63]; Korea [64]; Mexico [29]; Poland [65]; Romania [66]; Serbia [67]; South Africa [68,69]; Spain [70,71]; Taiwan [50]; and Vietnam [51]. Despite this steady growth of empirically based research studies, while attending conferences, serving as peer reviewers for journals, book chapters, and book proposals, and reading recent publications, we have become increasingly aware of persistent mentions to a body of ‘lore’, or received wisdom, that do not always align with the findings of empirical research or engage with the theoretical discussions advanced in much scholarship on multilingual scholars writing for publication

  • We argue in this paper that the practice of relying on such lore without considering it against research findings and/or engaging with theoretical and ideological discussions may serve to constrain how researchers: (1) understand the complex phenomena entailed in contemporary academic publishing practices; (2) develop research methodologies to investigate the many related issues; (3) unpack the politics of global knowledge production; (4) mount challenges to the presumed global hegemony of English in academic publishing; and (5) design and provide support to multilingual writers

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the past 30 years, academics around the world have increasingly become subject to “evaluation regimes” [1] that quantify research output in multiple ways, often calibrated to high-status journal citation indexes such as those in the Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) and driven, for example, by the global rush for university rankings [2]. The research base spans global geolinguistic locations, with work coming from the Anglophone “center”; bi/multilingual contexts such as French-speaking Canada [57]; and locations including Argentina [58]; China [59]; Egypt [60]; Iceland [61]; Japan [23,62]; Kazakhstan [63]; Korea [64]; Mexico [29]; Poland [65]; Romania [66]; Serbia [67]; South Africa [68,69]; Spain [70,71]; Taiwan [50]; and Vietnam [51] Despite this steady growth of empirically based research studies, while attending conferences, serving as peer reviewers for journals, book chapters, and book proposals, and reading recent publications, we have become increasingly aware of persistent mentions to a body of ‘lore’, or received wisdom, that do not always align with the findings of empirical research or engage with the theoretical discussions advanced in much scholarship on multilingual scholars writing for publication.

Why Talk about ‘Lore’?
Lore about Multilingual Writers
Lore about Journal Practices and Conventions
Lore about Developing Publishable Texts
Conclusions and Implications
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call