Group photo, New Technologies in Intercultural Communication Symposium (Image credit: Language on the Move)

On a crack-of-dawn flight early Monday morning last week, I flew to Sydney for the day to attend “New Technologies in Intercultural Communication“, a symposium hosted by the Language on the Move Team at Macquarie University.

The presentations explored intercultural communication ranging from the use of digital technologies by elderly migrants and their families (Dr Earvin Charles B. Cabalquinto), GenAI as digital shadow care support by international students (Dr Julia Kantek and Dr Thilakshi Mallawa Arachchi), language learning tools by transnational parents for heritage language maintenance (Dr Ana Sofia Bruzon), learning technologies in primary science classrooms in Australia and Korea (Dr Hye-Eun Chu), and social media in language learning (Dr Yeong-Ju Lee). And to think the new technology promising proficiency and fluency “back in my day” (I find myself relating to a joke Professor Piller made about technological development) relied on cassette tapes at the language lab!

The symposium showcased a fascinating catalogue of digital technologies enabling intercultural communication. We heard about high school students in an Australian classroom connecting with Korean students to hypothesize why the seasons differ between their two countries. We heard of transnational parents employing creative ways to encourage their children to connect to their heritage languages, especially to communicate with family members. It was also intriguing to hear how social media platforms such as Tiktok offer features such as “duet”, creating opportunities for speakers of different languages to collaborate and co-construct meaning.

While we heard of these novel and exciting ways technology can be used to enhance intercultural communication, each presenter emphasized the human element in communication. I could not help but think about how language learning tends to be marketed as fun, brain-boosting, or career-enhancing. And yet, language in human relationships is messy, and missteps happen! Even so, whether you already speak the language or are learning an additional one, I believe empathy and deeper understanding are borne out of the struggle to communicate and truly connect with each other.

The most striking point for me was that some uses of technology actually stem from institutional failures or social exclusion, leaving the vulnerable members of our society even more marginalized. Earvin reminded us that although much of the discussion seems to be on the importance of digital literacy skills, many still lack basic access to technological infrastructure that we often take for granted in urban Australia. Julia and Thilakshi’s presentation highlighted the isolation that international students experience, turning to GenAI for immediate advice on legal matters, polishing their resumes, or easing homesickness. Ana pointed to multilingual parents’ struggles of heritage language maintenance in the face of pervasive monolingual mindset across Australian schooling and public discourse.

As I flew back to Brisbane that evening, reflecting on the presentations, discussion questions, and conversations I had with fellow attendees strengthened my resolve to keep pushing for equity in language learning and digital access.

We need to keep asking: How do we use technology for intercultural communication? Who gets left out? And how can we keep working towards digital and social inclusion?

I want to thank UQ School of Education for making it possible for me to attend the symposium, and to Distinguished Professor Ingrid Piller, Dr Loy Lising, Dr Ana Sofia Bruzon and the Language on the Move team for bringing together a rich program and creating the opportunity to hear from and exchange ideas with other scholars.

Description: Digital technologies are in the process of fundamentally reshaping communication. There are significant opportunities: chatbots can personalize language teaching in a way unimaginable until recently and machine translation promises to widen participation for ever more people, regardless of their language proficiency. Yet these opportunities come with the harms caused by screen addiction, surveillance, and environmental destruction.

In this one-day research symposium we move beyond both the hype and the fearmongering to examine the real-life use of digital technologies in multilingual and intercultural communication. How can digital technologies help to bridge language barriers to social participation? What new barriers do they create? And what research agenda do we need to harness technological transformation for social inclusion in our linguistically and culturally diverse society?

Attendance is free but places are limited. To secure your place, sign up for the event at https://events.humanitix.com/new-technologies-in-intercultural-communication or scan the QR code.

Date and venue

Monday, Dec 08, 2025
Macquarie University, Wallumattagul Campus, Ryde

Program [updated Nov 21, 2025]

09:30-10:00      Arrival, Meet & Greet
10:00-10:30      Welcome
10:30-11:15      Earvin Cabalquinto (Monash U), The myth of digital inclusion: Locating non-digital influences in the migrant’s home
11:15-12:00      Julia Kantek and Thilakshi Mallawa Arachchi (WSU), Sustaining livelihoods in ‘the shadows’: International students’ use of GenAI as digital shadow care support
12:00-13:00      Lunch break
13:00-13:45     Ana Sofia Bruzon (MQ), Using tech in bilingual transnational parenting
13:45-14:30      Hye Eun Chu (MQ), Bridging Language and Inquiry in Diverse Science Classrooms
14:30-15:15      Yeong-Ju Lee (MQ), Social Media and Language Learning
15:15-15:45      Coffee break
15:45-16:30      Laura Smith-Khan (UNE), “Connectivity is the central thing”: Developing legal literacy post-migration
16:30-17:00      Closing panel: Gerard Goggin (UWS) and Ingrid Piller (UHH&MQ), moderated by Sarah McMonagle (UHH)
17:00-18:30      Reception & networking

Abstracts and bio blurbs

Earvin Cabalquinto (Monash U), The myth of digital inclusion: Locating non-digital influences in the migrant’s home

Abstract: The home is a vital space for shaping an individual’s personal, familial and social relations and growth. In an increasingly digital and global economy, such domestic terrain has been reconfigured into a highly mediated and transnational space. For migrants and their networks who constantly navigate their marginalised position in contemporary societies, a home at a distance embodies the paradox of cross-border and virtual mobility. Homing necessitates digital media use, a tactic for coping with the pains of physical separation. Yet, everyday connections, impacted by intersecting social, economic and political factors, become a source of frustrations and discomfort. In this provocation, I offer a critical reflection of the principles, dynamics, and contradictions of digital inclusion by unlocking the migrants’ mediated home. I draw key insights from more than ten years of multi-sited interviews and visual ethnography among the Filipino diaspora in Australia and their local and transnational networks. Significantly, I attempt to locate and centre the asymmetrical non-digital factors – personal, cultural, economic, and political – that deeply impacts the enactment, embodiment and negotiations of the home among migrants and their distant networks. In sum, the presentation provides a critical vantage point to further rethink digital inclusion by disrupting one-size-fits-all and geographically-bounded solutions and foreground situated, relational, and transnational approaches for understanding and redressing intertwined social and digital inequalities.

Bio: Dr Earvin Charles B. Cabalquinto is an Australian Research Council (ARC) Discovery Early Career Research Award (DECRA) Research Fellow and Senior Lecturer in the School of Media, Film and Journalism at Monash University, Australia. He has held Visiting fellowships in Lancaster University, United Kingdom (2019), University of Jyväskylä, Finland (2021), Canada Excellence Research Chair (CERC) in Migration and Integration, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada (2024), and Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore (2025). He is the author of (Im)mobile Homes: Family Life at a Distance in the Age of Mobile Media” (Oxford University Press). He is the co-author of Philippine Digital Cultures: Brokerage Dynamics on YouTube (Amsterdam University Press). He sits in the editorial board of top journals, including the International Journal of Cultural Studies, Convergence:  The international journal of research into new media technologies, and Journal of Global Ageing. His research on the impacts of digitalisation on migration has been widely published in top-tier journal outlets and specialised edited collections.  His research agenda is driven by critically exploring the dynamics and impacts of digital inclusion and exclusion among migrants and their networks who navigate an increasingly digital and global society. To know more about his projects and outputs, visit www.ecabalquinto.com.

Julia Kantek & Thilakshi Mallawa Arachchi, Sustaining livelihoods in ‘the shadows’: International students’ use of GenAI as digital shadow care support

Abstract: International students are navigating a multitude of structural challenges, including rising living costs, shifting visa conditions, and an intensifying housing affordability crisis. These pressures unfold within a broader post-welfare context, marked by reduced government support for temporary migrants and limited investment in student services. This paper explores how international students use Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) to navigate these challenges. Drawing on focus groups (N=3) and interviews (N=21), we reveal how ChatGPT (and similar GenAI tools) function as digital shadow care infrastructures, helping students ‘get by’ and navigate everyday precarity (legal, financial, and emotional). By situating GenAI within students’ broader care assemblages, this study contributes to digital migration scholarship, highlighting how GenAI tools ‘fill the cracks’ left open by inadequate formal supports, as well as identifying the factors that shape GenAI use within these contexts. Overall, we argue for policies that not only recognise these shadowed practices, but educate and empower migrants to use AI tools safely and effectively.

Western Sydney University Research team: Dr Julia Kantek, Dr Donna James, Dr Thilakshi Mallawa Arachchi & Distinguished Professor Gerard Goggin

Bio: Dr Julia Kantek is a Lecturer in the School of Social Sciences at Western Sydney University. Julia has developed research expertise at the intersection of youth sociology, migration studies, and diaspora engagement. Her work explores the ways various transitions (such as those induced by migration, education, and work) shape belonging, identity formation, and wellbeing. Julia is currently co-leading two funded projects through the Young & Resilient Research Centre and the Institute for Culture & Society at Western Sydney University. One explores how digital technologies function as infrastructures of care for migrants, while the other investigates how young people from Western Sydney navigate work-related aspirations and transitions.

Bio: Dr Thilakshi Mallawa Arachchi is a researcher, educator, and activist with a passion for justice, working to nurture caring, connected communities through collective action. Her interdisciplinary background spans digital media studies, media literacy, migration, feminism, higher education, and climate activism. She completed her PhD at Western Sydney University in March 2025, investigating how cultural institutions, such as public libraries, can co-design equity-centred social media literacy education interventions with women from refugee backgrounds.

Ana Sofia Bruzon, Using tech in bilingual transnational parenting

Abstract: Against the background of the digitisation of all spheres of life, including childhood, this project asks how transnational parents use new technologies to support their children’s heritage language learning and use. Guided by a conceptual framework based in language policy and a sociolinguistic ethnographic approach, interview, questionnaire and observational data were collected from 17 Spanish-speaking families in Australia to examine digital technology use in the family, particularly in relation to heritage language maintenance.

Findings show that each of three focal technologies – TV and film, digital communication platforms, and learning apps – has a primary purpose which is not related to heritage language maintenance but results in specific affordances and constraints for heritage language learning and use. The primary purpose of TV and film is to provide entertainment. This allows for beneficial linguistic input in Spanish but is also constrained by child language proficiency and resistance against particular shows and language choices. Similarly, digital communication platforms serve the primary purpose of connecting with geographically dispersed kin. This provides valuable interactional opportunities in Spanish for children but is limited by the inability of distant kin to engage in child-centred communication strategies and is also subject to practical constraints such as time differences. Finally, learning apps are largely brought into the home by school requirements and serve the primary purpose of learning. Learning apps offer precious explicit and implicit Spanish language learning opportunities but parents worry that they expose children to harms such as excessive screen time.

Overall, the project constitutes a novel contribution to the fields of family language policy and heritage language maintenance by concluding that digital technologies constitute a double-edged sword: their value in supporting multilingual practices in a monolingual society is significant but countervailed by limitations inherent in these technologies, particularly as they relate to broader developmental harms.

Bio: Ana Sofia Bruzon is a PhD candidate in the Department of Linguistics at Macquarie University, Sydney, and a member of the Language on the Move research team. Her research interests include education policy and practice, digital technology in education, and the intersection of language, education and law.

Her PhD focuses on heritage language maintenance, language and education policy, and the digital practices of transnational families. The thesis examines how transnational parents use new technologies to support their children’s language learning and education. Her MRes research, published as Piller, Bruzon, and Torsh (2023), focused on language and education policy and practice, investigating the online linguistic practices of multilingual schools. Ana has a background in law and is a member of the State Bar of California in the U.S., where she practised as an immigration, real estate, and family lawyer. Ana is fluent in English, Spanish, and Italian.

Hye-Eun Chu, Bridging Language and Inquiry in Diverse Science Classrooms

Abstract: Science classrooms are becoming increasingly multilingual and digital, raising urgent questions about how to integrate inquiry-based learning with language support. This presentation synthesises four studies that examine these challenges across Korean and Australian contexts. A survey of 144 Korean teachers revealed strong self-efficacy in inquiry teaching but low confidence in supporting the language needs of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students. Classroom observations in Korea showed that CLD students, despite linguistic difficulties, contributed creative and reflective ideas during model co-construction, enriching group learning. An intervention with Korean elementary students developed a Digital Science Text Reading Literacy (DSTRL) program, which significantly improved their abilities to search, read, and evaluate multimodal science texts. Finally, interviews with Australian and Korean physics teachers highlighted both enthusiasm and concerns about Language-Focused Teaching (LFT), balancing benefits for engagement and conceptual learning against practical constraints. Together, these findings call for teacher professional development that embeds language as integral to inquiry and leverages digital tools for inclusive participation.

Bio: Dr Chu is a Senior Lecturer in Macquarie’s School of Education. Her research has focused on several key areas, including monitoring students’ understanding of science concepts, implementing formative assessment in science classrooms, interdisciplinary approaches to teaching science, affective factors affecting science learning, and the integration of the arts into the teaching of science and related subjects (STEAM). Additionally, she has conducted research in conceptual development in science learning, tracking students’ concept development through text (language) analysis, interdisciplinary teaching of environmental literacy with science, and the influence of student beliefs on science learning. Recently, her work has expanded to include studies on the application of AI in education.

Yeong-Ju Lee, Social Media and Language Learning

Abstract: This presentation draws on my new book ‘Social Media and Language Learning: Using TikTok and Instagram’ (Lee, 2025), which investigates how visual and multimodal technologies transform informal language learning and intercultural exchange. The book analyses two studies: a comparative analysis of online data from Instagram and TikTok posts, and a multiple case study based on ethnographic data of narratives from international students in Australia. These studies show how learners use multimodal features such as sound, captioning, and visual composition to create and share meaning across linguistic and cultural boundaries. Based on these findings, in this presentation I will discuss how social media platforms have become everyday spaces where linguistic agency, creativity, and belonging are negotiated in transnational contexts. I will also consider how AI-driven features in social media such as automatic captioning, real-time translation, and personalised content feeds are creating new opportunities while posing pedagogical challenges for multilingual learning.

Reference

Lee, Y.-J. (2025). Social media and language learning: using TikTok and Instagram. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003543541

Bio: Yeong-Ju Lee obtained her PhD from the Department of Linguistics at Macquarie University in Australia. She teaches courses in Applied Linguistics, TESOL, and Literacy. Her research interests include digital language learning and teaching, especially on social media and AI. She is a Chief Investigator of the Data Horizon Research Centre-funded project on a customised AI chatbot for language learning at Macquarie University, and the Teaching Development Grant-funded project on AI and literacy at Australian Catholic University.

Laura Smith-Khan, “Connectivity is the central thing”: Developing legal literacy post-migration

Abstract: Developing a sound understanding of the law is essential for social participation and access to justice, and in the context of migration, can form a crucial part of integrating and flourishing in a new country. Yet there can be a range of challenges for new arrivals when it comes to developing legal literacy, and for service providers seeking to assist them. This presentation will share emerging findings from pilot research on Australian government and non-government service providers’ efforts to help educate the public about Australia law, legal processes and legal services. Drawing on an examination of research interviews, survey responses and public texts, the preliminary findings indicate that while online resources and technology are one element of such efforts, human connectivity and care remain crucial.

Bio: Dr Laura Smith-Khan is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of New England, Australia and an external affiliated member of the Centre for the Social Study of Migration and Refugees (CESSMIR), Gent University, Belgium. Her research is interested in the participation of minoritized groups in legal settings, especially migration processes. She was the 2022 recipient of the Max Crawford Medal, Australia’s most prestigious award for achievement and promise in the humanities. She is co-founder and co-convener of the Law and Linguistics Interdisciplinary Research Network, a member of Language on the Move and Next Generation Literacies and serves on the editorial boards of Multilingua and the Australian Journal of Human Rights.

Dr Smith-Khan has written extensively on language and credibility in Australia’s asylum procedures. Beyond her continuing work in this area, she has undertaken research on the education and communicative practices of migration practitioners, on media representations of migration, and on disability rights in forced migration. Aiming for impact, her research has been cited and adopted by the EU Agency for Asylum, the Australian Human Rights Commission, UNHCR and UNESCO, and is used in undergraduate and postgraduate teaching. She has tertiary qualifications in both law and linguistics and has been admitted to practice as a lawyer.

“AI can’t teach our kids to be curious and think critically” (Image credit: ABC News, Jason Om)

UNESCO’s ‘Digital Learning Week’, which focused on AI and the future of education, was held earlier this month, and debates about the role of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in the classroom have taken centre stage in education policy research. Around the world, educators, school administrators, and government officials are grappling with ethical questions surrounding the use of GAI and related technologies, such as commercial Large Language Models (LLMs), in teaching and learning.

The use of GAI in school poses serious and urgent questions: Should GAI be implemented in schools, and do we have sufficient knowledge about its educational merit (if any)?

Despite the hype, there is little positive evidence that this technology can actually improve student outcomes. But there is plenty of negative evidence that is cause for concern: it may lead to the dehumanization of learning. This is not surprising given that, even in commercial settings, the promise of increased productivity is not being fulfilled.

Still, schools are rushing to adopt GAI despite a wealth of evidence showing that the recent uncritical adoption of mobile phones and social media has in fact been harmful to children’s development. As a society, we are trying to pull back from feeding these technologies to our children. Still, even with these precedents, schools are adopting commercial AI technologies in the classroom uncritically, without fully considering their potential harms.

The challenges of GAI use in education are multifaceted and multilayered, ranging from concerns about ethics and academic integrity to privacy issues related to the ‘datafication’ of learning and childhood, to actual physical threats and harm to students. Beyond the psychosocial and physical harms to children, research has shown that “LLMs exacerbate, rather than alleviate, inequality” in learning, given that a few large corporations control the computation infrastructures on which these models run. So, against this background, what does Australian policy state regarding GAI in education?

In Australia, the latest guiding framework for the use of GAI in education is the ‘Australian Framework for Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Schools’ (The Framework). Developed by the Federal Government in partnership with states, territories, and other regulatory bodies such as the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), The Framework aims to define what “safe, ethical and responsible use of generative AI should look like to support better school outcomes” (p. 3).

As a guiding principle, The Framework highlights that critical thinking must be at the forefront of GAI use in schools, and that GAI should not replace or restrict human thought and experience.

However, what does it mean to use GAI “critically”? The research is clear that the regular use of GAI in learning quickly leads to over-reliance, which negatively affects cognitive abilities. Arguing that critically engaging with AI means empowering students to evaluate the machine’s output for themselves is similar to suggesting that we should teach students incorrect content and then ask them to form their own opinions.

The promise of GAI in education is that it will enable personalized learning. Unfortunately, machine-based ‘personalized learning’ forgoes the human-centered approach needed for a successful education. Instead, it relies on the datafication of students through continuous monitoring and surveillance. This shift in educational policy has sparked debate within academic circles about issues such as student privacy and safety, the ‘datafication’ of childhood, and how children’s data harvesting is used to shape their futures, effectively turning students into ‘algorithmic ensembles’.

Despite these real dangers, the latest iteration of the Australian school curriculum has explicitly incorporated GAI into the curriculum, supporting its use for whole school planning and providing teachers with the option of content elaboration using GAI (Australian Government Department of Education, 2025). The incorporation of GAI into the curriculum raises safety and welfare concerns for children, as they could be exposed to harmful materials and dangerous interactions, and a recent tragedy has brought to the surface the dark side of this technology. This heartbreaking case highlights that this technology may not be suitable for children, given their vulnerability to certain features of GAI, such as agreeability and dependence, which are design features aimed at engineering addiction. These technologies are still in their experimental stages, and we know little about the effects they may have on developing brains.

The premature and uncritical adoption of GAI in schools rings a too-familiar note to the uncritical adoption of social media in youth, which many governments around the globe are now trying to reverse, including Australia.

Vague policies that encourage the use of AI in schooling mean that teachers and schools are using the tool without a clear evidence base, in inconsistent ways, and without obtaining full parental consent. In my PhD research, I found that parents often resent the amount of technology schools use for education, and I also discovered that these technologies follow students home, encroaching on their private lives. Schools are taking away the parental prerogative of deciding when and how they introduce technologies such as GAI to their children, forcing them down a path they might prefer their children not to go.

Overall, the “critical” use of GAI in education must mean that rejection of GAI is an option. An option that is increasingly precluded by the headlong rush into the GAI hype.

Related content from our podcast

• Episode 57: The Social Impact of Automating Translation: Tazin Abdullah in conversation with Ester Monzó-Nebot (03/08/2025)
• Episode 55: Improving quality of care for patients with limited English: Brynn Quick in conversation with Leah Karliner (26/06/2025)
• Episode 50: Researching language and digital communication: Brynn Quick in conversation with Christian Ilbury (22/04/2025)
• Episode 46: Intercultural competence in the digital age: Brynn Quick in conversation with Amy McHugh (12/03/2025)
• Episode 41: Why teachers turn to AI: Brynn Quick in conversation with Sue Ollerhead (09/01/2025)

The conversation delves into ideological issues involved in the widespread use of machine translation and the real-life impact for those who may rely on machine translations in various situations. Esther’s research and the wide variety of contributions to the book highlight the need to open a discussion about instilling an ‘ethics of care’ perspective into the use of technology to make AI generated translations more inclusive and relevant for the communities using them.

If you liked this episode, support us by subscribing to the Language on the Move Podcast on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Transcript (coming soon)

Isabella’s Award Certificate (Image credit: Yixi Qiu)

Congratulations to Language-on-the-Move team member Dr Yixi Qiu (Isabella) for winning an award under the Shanghai Magnolia Pujiang Talent Program (上海白玉兰浦江人才计划) for her project “人工智能赋能双一流理工特色高校学生学术论文写作能力培养” (“AI Empowerment for Enhancing Academic Writing Skills among Students in Double First-Class STEM Universities”).

The Shanghai Magnolia Pujiang Talent Program was launched in 2005 by the Shanghai Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau and the Science and Technology Commission. It aims to attract and support overseas-returned scholars to contribute to research, innovation, and social development in Shanghai.

For Isabella, who is now an Assistant Professor at the School of Foreign Studies, Tongji University, this is a fantastic recognition and remarkable opportunity to reestablish herself in Shanghai after her time in Sydney.

人工智能赋能双一流理工特色高校学生学术论文写作能力培养 (“AI Empowerment for Enhancing Academic Writing Skills among Students in Double First-Class STEM Universities”)

Isabella’s project focuses on integrating generative AI into academic writing pedagogy, with the goal of supporting STEM students in developing stronger writing competence. Drawing on our team’s long-term research program into the relationship of linguistic diversity and social participation, “AI Empowerment for Enhancing Academic Writing Skills among Students in Double First-Class STEM Universities” conceptualizes writing as more than a technical skill. Instead, Isabella approaches it as a means of expressing agency, negotiating identity, and participating in academic and social life. The aim is to explore the potential of AI to support multilingual students in accessing richer linguistic, social, and epistemic resources, for personal and collective growth.

For background, “Double First-Class University” refers to a university in China that has been selected for development under the Double First-Class Initiative (双一流), launched by the Chinese government in 2015. The goal is to cultivate: First-Class Universities and First-Class Disciplines. These universities and their designated disciplines are given special funding and policy support to become world-leading in research, education, and global influence. Examples of such institutions include Tongji University, where Isabella is based, and Fudan University, where she did her PhD.

Next Generation Literacies and the power of global networking

Isabella’s project was partly inspired by her membership in the Next Generation Literacies network. This network connects the Fudan Multilingual Innovation Research Team under the leadership of Professor Yongyan Zheng and the broader Shanghai Multilingualism Research Alliance with the Language-on-the-Move team at Macquarie University, and the Literacy-in-Diversity-Settings (LiDS) Research Center at University of Hamburg. Next Generation Literacies is a part of the strategic trilateral relationship of these three universities but includes researchers from many other universities from around the globe.

More exciting hot-off-the-press news for the network: Next Generation Literacies has been the launch pad for a new International Research Network (IRN) devoted to “Literacy in Multilingual Contexts” under the umbrella of the World Education Research Association (WERA). The “Literacy in Multilingual Contexts” IRN will be led by LiDS member Dr Irina Usanova. Watch this space to learn more about the IRN as it constitutes itself!

The magnolia and the river

The magnolia (白玉兰) is the official city flower of Shanghai symbolizing openness and elegance, while Pujiang (浦江) refers to the Huangpu River, which flows through the heart of the city. Together, the Magnolia Pujiang Talent Program reflects Shanghai’s vision of cultivating global talent rooted in local vitality.

An impressive example of our maxim to think globally and to act locally. Congratulations again, Isabella! 恭喜!

Mia Wallace (Image credit: Wikipedia)

In Quentin Tarantino’s blockbuster Pulp Fiction, Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) asks Vincent Vega (John Travolta) whether he hates uncomfortable silences.  Mia ponders ‘Why is it necessary to yak about bullshit to feel comfortable?’

Regarded as ‘one of the great arts of conversation’, silence is key to how we communicate. Linguist Deborah Tannen explains that silence is ambiguous. It may arise from what is assumed to be evidenced (and thus too obvious to even mention), or that which is supposed to be omitted.

Either way, humans are highly skilled at using silence in conversation through a process of socialisation refined as we move from the cradle to the grave.

When humans interact with generative Artificial Intelligence (generative AI) they tend to assume they are interacting with a fellow human, and they may even assume that these conversations are based on cooperation but they are missing a key piece of the interactional puzzle: the intentional use of silence.

To generate answers to our prompts, generative AI relies on mathematical probabilities. Large language models provide a plausible continuation of a likely next word based on vast amounts of data. Once the most probable next word is identified, the system moves on. Language models are a form of text processing. With silence, though, the text that should be processed is absent.

https://skepticalscience.com/graphics/SprialOfSilence-EN.jpg

When prompted to expand on how it approaches silence, ChatGPT-4 explains that minimal responses may be provided when a given input could lead to contentious or escalating conversations as a strategy to avoid conflict. That is, ChatGPT may sometimes provide a minimal response to ensure safety.

However, silence is not just a strategy to avoid conflict, it plays a key role in human interaction because what is left unsaid has meaning.

When silence points to great danger

In parts of Spain an algorithm called VioGén is used to determine whether a victim of domestic violence is in danger of being attacked again. The algorithm may get it wrong because victims may be embarrassed and not provide a response to direct questions such as ‘Has the aggressor demonstrated substance abuse?’ In such cases, the algorithm interprets the silence as the absence of a ‘yes’ response. In the absence of qualified humans to contextualise silent answers to the algorithm’s questions, the platform tends to miscalculate risk. This has led to multiple victim deaths which might have been avoided with appropriate human intervention.

Why does silence matter?

The expectation that human answers to direct queries will necessarily be lexicalised (manifested as words) does not align with how humans communicate. In conversation, silence is used strategically to express feelings or ideas which are best left unsaid.

One of the main reasons for the use of silence rests on what linguists call ‘face’ and ‘facework’ – ritual elements related to the fragility of our social interactions. When we speak, we spend a lot of our time saving our own and others’ ‘face’. In expressing a challenging opinion to a superior at work, for example, we may use the epistemic phrase ‘I think’ to preface our views to avoid threatening the other person’s right to a positive view of themselves.

Silence sits at the core of social relations across cultures. Each society tolerates a different length of silence in conversation. Mia Wallace’s complaint is her venting against mainstream American culture which tends to favour verbosity over silence. However, not all people in America embrace verbosity. For example, Scollon and colleagues argue that in Alaskan Athabaskan culture, the best interactions between two or more people involve long periods of silence.

Westerners’ need to fill air space with talk also aligns with a preference for direct questions to obtain information. Direct questioning, however, tends to be disfavoured by First Nations people in Australia. In the courtroom, yes/no questions are asked. Small differences in answer timing are sometimes magnified and misinterpreted as hostility by a system biased to stereotype minoritised populations, which may result in longer sentences for the accused.

Different orientations to silence also exist in the classroom, where Japanese students of English tend to miss out on opportunities to hold the floor because of their longer use of silence. Once the conversational floor is taken away, Japanese students find it hard to regain it. It’s not that Japanese students lack in fluency, it is just that expectations regarding the use of silence differ from those of mainstream Australia.

As society continues to embrace automation, algorithms, and AI, it is important to remain aware that not all people on earth behave like the mainstream English speakers who tend to design the technology. It’s also important to embrace language for what it is: a complex communicative system which includes way more than what may be expressed through words. When it comes to language, there is certainly more than meets the eye/ear/hand.

A wonderful companion read to this episode is Distinguished Ingrid Piller’s Can we escape the textocalypse? Academic publishing as community building.

If you liked this episode, check out more resources on technology and language: Will technology make language rights obsolete?; the podcast Tech Won’t Save Us; and Are language technologies counterproductive to learning?

(Image credit: EduResearch Matters)

If you enjoy the show, support us by subscribing to the Language on the Move Podcast on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Transcript (by Brynn Quick, added on February 21, 2025)

Brynn: Welcome to the Language on the Move Podcast, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Brynn Quick and I’m a PhD candidate in linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. My guest today is Dr. Sue Ollerhead.

Sue grew up in multilingual South Africa, a country with 12 official languages, where she learned English, Afrikaans, Isizulu, Isikosa, and French at school and university. She is currently a Senior Lecturer in Languages and Literacy Education and the Director of the Secondary Education Program at Macquarie University. Her expertise lies in English language and literacy learning and teaching in multicultural and multilingual education contexts.

Her research interests include translanguaging, multilingual pedagogies, literacy across the curriculum and oracy development in schools. Sue is currently Editor of TESOL in Context, the peer-reviewed journal of the Australian Council of TESOL Associations. She serves on the Executive Board of the English as a Medium of Instruction Centre, EMI, at Macquarie University.

Today, Sue and I are going to chat about an article that she’s recently written for the Australian Association for Research in Education, entitled, Teachers Truly Know Students and How They Learn, Does AI? We’ll discuss the emergence of AI platforms like ChatGPT and how they are affecting teacher training and student learning. Sue, welcome to the show, and thank you so much for joining us today.

Dr Ollerhead: Hi, Brynn. Lovely to be here today.

Brynn: To get us started, can you tell us a bit about yourself and about how you became an educator in the English as an additional language space?

Dr Ollerhead: Thanks, Brynn. As you said, I grew up in what you would call a super diverse country, South Africa, which is also very multilingual with 12 official languages. So as well as you said, I learned English, Afrikaans, Isizulu, Isikosa, and French at school.

I would also hear a plethora of language mixing or translanguaging by people all around me all the time. And when I finished university, I began my teaching career at a TESOL Medium Primary School and then went on to teach Zulu-speaking factory workers in South Africa’s Adult Migrant Literacy Program. I’ve also spent a large part of my working life teaching English and working in educational publishing in Sub-Saharan Africa and the United Kingdom.

So always within very multilingual and multi-cultural context. And I guess what surprised me when moving to Australia in my mid-30s, was the monolingualness of the schools and working environments that I was working in, which seemed to be at odds with what I knew to be a significant proportion of people living in Australia, speaking languages other than English at home. It was almost as though those became invisible in the public sphere and English seemed to dominate everything.

So, I guess that questioning of monolingual public spaces and how they include or exclude people has driven a lot of my research work. I think particularly how children who speak languages other than English at home can be excluded within classrooms that adopt an English only approach to learning. I guess the focus of my academic career over the past 10 to 15 years has always been to train students to become knowledgeable, reflective, and responsive teachers of learners from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.

Brynn: That’s amazing. You really did have a lot of multilingual experience. That’s so cool that you were able to be in an environment with so many different languages like that.

And I think that that must be really useful for you as an educator for not just students like primary or secondary school students, but now that you teach future teachers how to teach. So, let’s talk about this article that you’ve written called Teachers Truly Know Students and How They Learn, Does AI. So, this article discusses the use of AI and platforms like ChatGPT in this teacher training, which you do.

And one important part of learning how to teach is learning how to write effective lesson plans. I mean, I remember doing that for my own teacher training course that I went through when I became a TESOL educator as well. So, talk to us about, I guess, the importance of lesson plans and also about this emerging use of AI in lesson plan creation and what we know about the percentage of teachers who are actually using AI to create their lesson plans.

Dr Ollerhead: I think I heard a statistic the other day that teachers have, on average, about eight minutes to plan lessons over and above the other duties they have. So, we know that teacher workload is a very big issue. And there’s no surprise then that busy teachers are turning to GenAI models like ChatGPT or Perplexity to streamline lesson planning.

I certainly am no expert on AI, but it’s very much part of the landscape now in teacher education. And we know that for teachers, simply by entering prompts, like generate a three-lesson sequence on maybe something like Agricultural Innovation in Australia, they can quickly receive a detailed teaching program tailored to the lesson content, compete with learning outcomes, suggested resources, classroom management tips, and more. So, this is fantastic.

It represents a pragmatic solution to busy teachers, to overwhelming workloads. And it also explains why they’re being taken up quite readily by school teachers and also in places of higher education and teacher training environments. And as far as how many teachers use AI for lesson planning, I suppose a useful survey would be one that was run by the Australian Association of Independent Schools in 2023, where they reported over 70% of primary teachers and 80% of secondary teachers were using generative AI tools in their work.

And the lesson planning or learning design was rated as the top AI assisted task. Now, granted the survey dates back to August 2023, but one could assume that uptake is even greater by now. And in my work as a secondary teacher educator, my observations of AI use amongst teachers across government, independent and Catholic sectors generally support these findings.

Brynn: I can understand why, honestly, because, I mean, we are both educators and I get it, our workloads are huge, and especially if you think about teachers who, I guess, are working in the primary and the secondary school levels, they are not just working from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. every day. They are putting in so many more hours that people don’t actually see happening.

And then to have to create, not just create lesson plans, but I think maybe people don’t realize that various departments of education or different sectors require you to document these lesson plans in a very specific way and you need to map them onto learning outcomes and objectives and things like that.

So, it’s not just quote unquote creating a lesson plan. You have to really put a lot of effort into it. And if you’re saying that teachers are only getting something like eight minutes to do that, that’s unfathomable. That’s untenable.

Dr Ollerhead: Absolutely. Very, very overwhelming. And we know that lesson planning is really, really important.

A well-planned lesson is really fundamental to classroom management, to effective differentiation, to really, really considering the accessibility of the content. But it is a big task on top of, as you say, all the other tasks that teachers are having to fulfill on a daily basis.

Brynn: You just mentioned something called differentiation. And I think that this is a really important point to talk about. So, talk to us about this concept of differentiation in teaching.

What does it mean? And why is it a concept that teachers need to keep in mind when they’re planning their lessons?

Dr Ollerhead: The D word, yes, differentiation. It’s probably one of the most important and most challenging things to learn when training to become a teacher. And it really, Brynn, it really lies at the heart of Australian Professional Teaching Standard 1.3, which is “know students and how they learn”.

And especially knowing about how to differentiate for students from different cultural, linguistic, religious and socio-economic backgrounds. Differentiation in general refers to the practice of tailoring instruction to meet the varied learning profiles, backgrounds and abilities of each child or student in your class. And it starts with really understanding the diversity profile of your class.

So, for example, I said in the article that let’s say you teach a class where 95% of your class comes from a language background other than English. And you might think, well, that’s unrealistic. Actually, in Sydney, it really isn’t.

There are many areas where that would be the norm rather than the exception. In fact, in New South Wales, one in three students comes from a language background other than English. And in your class, your class comprises a mix of high achieving, gifted and talented individuals, some of whom are expert English users, while others might be newly arrived in Australia and they might have been assessed as emerging on the ELD Learning Progression, which is a tool that we use to measure where students are in their English language learning trajectory.

Now, these students need targeted language support to be able to even access the content of the curriculum. And let’s say your students come from various backgrounds. Some might be Aboriginal Australian students, others might come from countries as diverse as Sudan, China, Afghanistan, Bangladesh.

Some might even have spent three or more years in refugee camps before arriving in Australia, with no access to formal education at all. Others live in Sydney without their families. So, yeah, some are highly literate.

And while others have yet to master basic academic literacies and literacy skills in English. So given this diverse scenario in one class, and as I said, that is actually often the norm, rather than the exception. Differentiation can include things like the types of teaching strategies that you use.

So, using a variety of teaching strategies to engage students at different levels. So, for example, your highly proficient English users might work on extension activities that challenge their critical thinking. New arrivals who are still coming to grips with English as a medium of instruction could benefit from visual aids, graded texts, interactive group work to help them grasp key concepts.

We could also differentiate in terms of the assessment that we use. So, we might implement diverse assessment strategies that allow students to demonstrate their understanding in ways that align with their language proficiency and educational background. So, this might include allowing students to present their knowledge through oral projects or visual representations rather than traditional written assessments.

I always give the example of the water cycle. A child doesn’t necessarily come to the classroom not knowing anything about the water cycle. It’s just that they’re not able to understand it.

They’re not able to express that knowledge in English. So, giving them another mode through which to express that knowledge is really, really important. Of course, language support is very important as well.

So, for those students who are especially new arrivals, who are emergent on the EAL/D learner progression, we can provide targeted language support to scaffolding techniques that can involve using sentence starters, graphic organisers, active vocabulary acquisition activities, specifically designed for the content being taught. You know, in second year, we have a lot of technical vocabulary that is very specific to the field in which you’re teaching. So, for example, the word culture in science means something very different to the way it’s used in society and culture, for example.

And we actually need to think, well, this needs to be, these differences need to be made explicit for our learners, especially those who come from EAL/D backgrounds. But I guess one aspect that’s often overlooked is cultural differentiation. And this refers to modifying lesson content to be culturally relevant and accessible to all students.

So, it’s not just a sink or swim situation where we expect students to come to Australia and understand everything about Australia and its culture. What it means is integrating examples and materials into your lesson that reflect the backgrounds of your students and the various cultural contexts they come from and connecting your curriculum to their experiences. So, Robin Maloney and Leslie Harbin and Susan Oguro have written an amazing book that actually encourages teachers to teach for linguistic responsiveness.

And they encourage teachers to ask questions like, before you teach content, it’s really helpful to ask yourself questions such as, what are my own biases and blind spots related to the subject matter? What insights might my students have that I’m unaware of? So, for example, we know in maths, all countries have mathematical systems that are very particular to their cultural context.

And those can be very rich learning opportunities for all students in the classroom. Also important is what sensitivities could arise in discussions about this content with concerning values, knowledge and language. And I think most importantly, how can I teach this material in a culturally and linguistically responsive manner that promotes my students’ well-being and achievement?

So, do my students see themselves reflected in this content? Or is it presented in a very sort of Australian, monocultural, monolingual way? That is the challenge that I always set for my students to master as teachers who are going into contexts where they’re going to be teaching in very diverse settings.

Brynn: And what I’m hearing in that explanation is that teachers are not just planning this, you know, one lesson plan, saying, okay, everybody in the class is going to be able to do this skill and they’re all at this level. Because even if we had a classroom of monolingual English Australian born students, there is no classroom in which every single student is at the same level on particular skills or in particular classes. So, teachers are already having to do this work constantly, even if they’re in this sort of more monolingual, monocultural environment.

But what I’m hearing you say, and it’s true, is that our reality, as people who live in Sydney and the surrounding suburbs, is that we are becoming more and more and more multilingual, multicultural, and that this is just reality, that teachers are having to now have these additional thoughts and these additional considerations as they plan lesson plans. And the thing is, with this expectation of, well, can teachers just use AI to plan lesson plans? Now we have to think, well, can AI actually take these things into consideration?

Dr Ollerhead: That’s exactly right, Brynn. And it really gets to the heart of what we know about teaching. We know that teaching is not just a science.

It’s not just a process of knowing a series of principles, a series of methods and applying them. It’s actually also an art in terms of that element of, I always say that I think the most important material for success as a teacher is the ability to listen well. So, a teacher that’s in tune with their students will really by default be able to differentiate because in the moment they’re hearing, OK, I’m not sure if my class has actually been taken along with me in this lesson.

I think I might have lost them somewhere. So, I’m not going to ask the question, does everybody understand? Because of course, you’re going to get the answer, yes, of course.

Nobody wants to say they don’t understand. It’s really about the art of listening in, of asking the right questions. And then based on the answers you get to those questions, saying, OK, how can I tailor my delivery to respond to the needs of my learners?

So, I can do many things really, really well. And there’s no doubt there’s a role for it in lesson planning. But I think I guess what I was hoping to explore in that article is that there’s an essential element of listening that is very human, listening and responding with empathy in the moment contingently, that at the moment is still very human, I think.

And I would like to think that with the rise of AI, and we’ve seen it just completely overtake all our expectations, instead of trying to compete with AI, I think what we need to do is to get better at what we do, and that’s being human. And I think that very human empathetic element of listening to our students, finding out more about who they are, where they come from, how they’re feeling today, are they actually even in a space to be learning about equations when they’re still trying to understand the new culture that they found themselves in. So, I guess that’s my biggest hope is that we’re going to graduate a generation of teachers who are really checking in and attuned to the wonderful diversity we have in our classrooms.

Brynn: I think that the whole concept of differentiation in teachers is inherently human. And another part that you talk about in the article that I think is along the same lines is thinking about lesson plan creation in conjunction with the concept of the quote virtual school bag, which I love.

So, what is a virtual school bag? And why is it something that teachers need to think about when planning their lessons, especially when considering linguistic and cultural diversity within a classroom? And then there’s this question of can we expect AI to be able to consider a student’s virtual school bag?

Dr Ollerhead: I’m so glad you asked about that, because that to me has always been a really powerful visual metaphor. And that’s the concept of the virtual school bag comes from Pat Thompson and the work that Barbara Koma has done from the University of Queensland. They’ve done amazing work on looking at the rich cultural and linguistic resources that students from language backgrounds other than English come with to the classroom.

And they conceptualize it in the form of a visual metaphor. And they say that many children come to school with their virtual backpack that’s filled with things like cultural knowledge, geographical knowledge, practical knowledge of cultures and customs and skills from their own context. We call those funds of knowledge.

But what happens is that often they’re asked to leave that schoolbag at the classroom door and not to unpack it. And it’s only really the mainstream resources that are unpacked in the classroom. And so, they say it’s very dehumanizing if children are prevented from showing others what’s in their backpack, what they have to bring to learning, what they have to bring to the teacher.

You know, as teachers, we’re constant learners as well. So, I find that a very powerful metaphor. And you can only really discover what’s in students’ or children’s virtual backpack if you create a space in which all knowledges and cultures are valued in the classroom.

Now, AI is a tool, but it’s not an environment, it’s not a climate, it’s not an ecosystem where children feel safe. That is the teacher’s role. And so, I work a lot with a concept, a theory and a practice of full translanguaging.

And we call that a translanguaging space or a stance where the teacher does not have to be proficient in every single language of the classroom but makes space for the articulation of those languages and cultures throughout certain aspects of their teaching.

Brynn: I think that it gets to this point that I do think that we’ve been seeing more and more in education in general over the last even just decade, which is that we can’t expect every student in a classroom to fit into this one mould. I’m thinking of even just different neuro types or different learning styles, let alone linguistic and cultural backgrounds. And I do think that as a society, we’re getting better at making space for all of those differences.

But I think that we have to keep in mind this long educational tradition of almost trying to force the mainstream that we saw happening, you know, kind of since the beginning of education, really. You know, I’m thinking back to like one room schoolhouses and things like that. And we have to think, okay, we know that that did not work.

You know, we’ve, I mean, I’m a millennial, and that was still very much the education system that I grew up with, was trying to fit all of these kids into this one mould. And so, what I can almost hear is people saying, well, but if we’ve got these multilingual, multicultural students, shouldn’t they just have to learn English? Shouldn’t they just have to assimilate and fit into Australian culture?

But you mentioned the humanity of the teacher and the teacher really recognizing the humanity of the students. And, you know, some people might say that actually, you know, using AI to create these lesson plans, it’s fine, because AI can be more objective. It can almost, you know, force this mainstream.

So, tell me what you would say to those people that are saying, like, well, shouldn’t we all be sort of fitting into this one mould?

Dr Ollerhead: Yeah, that’s a great question, Brynn. And I think it kind of taps into some very powerful discourses at the moment about things like explicit teaching and, you know, being very clear about what the outcomes are for lessons. And there’s definitely merit to explicit teaching and making, you know, making visible the things that students need to achieve in a lesson.

What I want to emphasize is that including students’ cultures and language in the classroom is not antithetical to teaching them how to learn in English. In fact, what we find is that it supports their English learning. And you know why it does that?

It’s because it validates students’ identities. It sees what they come with as a strength and it gets them engaged in lesson content and lesson activities. If you come to school and you don’t see a place for yourself in learning, you’re going to disengage.

And we know that that is a big barrier to successful learning. So these things do not actually necessarily that they don’t preclude each other. So we need to remember that the complete understanding of a student’s unique cultural background, their personal experiences and their emotional needs is complex and often requires human empathy and insight.

And if you’re ever in a classroom, I’m really fortunate to work with some incredible teachers. And I see so many teachers who have been in the field for a very long time. They might not even call what they say differentiation, what they do as differentiation, but they do it instinctively because it’s second nature to them to just tap into where students are, to listen intently, to quickly in the moment tweak their instruction or their strategies to meet their students’ needs.

But we can’t expect new teachers to understand that. We can’t expect new teachers to have the wherewithal to immediately differentiate, especially because our classrooms are becoming more multicultural and multilingual, because of globalization, because of migration. But strangely enough in Australia, that hasn’t actually meant that our teaching practices have become attuned to that increasing diversity.

And it’s something we can’t shy away from. It’s actually something that needs to be dealt with not just in early childhood or primary or secondary, but also at universities. And we really need to, I guess, rethink this “it’s simpler if everybody learns English” because that just doesn’t cut it anymore. We know that it benefits everybody when we have plurality in classrooms where we can learn from each other, where there’s genuine intercultural sharing and understanding. And I guess what we want to do as teacher-trainers and teacher-educators is to say teaching is an ongoing learning process.

But if you understand from the outset that the key to being an effective teacher is actually exercising that empathy, exercising that insight, I think that sets you up for success and it certainly sets your learners up for success. We know that even though AI is amazing in the way that it can analyse and recommend resources related to a student’s virtual school bag, teachers still play a crucial role in ensuring that those resources are integrated in a way that is thoughtful and responsive to each student’s needs.

Brynn: I love that idea of not denying the fact that we have AI, AI is here, people are using it. I mean, this is a whole other episode, but we see students use it as well in their writing.

It’s not something that we can close our eyes to and say, “No, no, this doesn’t exist. Let’s just pretend like it’s 25 years ago.” So, I love that you’re acknowledging, yeah, it exists, it can be a tool for certain things, especially for those busy, busy teachers who have so much that they have to accomplish in such a short amount of time.

But I just really love this idea of fundamentally, teachers have to tap into their humanity and their empathy, and they have to recognize the humanity in their students in order to create a more meaningful and productive classroom, because it’s really only going to be a net positive when we have that integration of cultures and languages and students working together, because in our globalized world, that’s what they’re going to have to do when they’re grownups anyway, you know?

So, you said that you can see AI being used as a tool. Where do you see it going? Where do you think it’s heading in the education and teacher training sectors, for good or for bad?

Dr Ollerhead: Yeah, I mean, you’ve summarized it so well Brynn, but I think it’s, I guess my hope is, and again, I mean, I don’t have a crystal ball, and you know, there’ve just been such rapid changes within the last two years. But my hope is that it will become a symbiotic relationship, where, I mean, for sure, the educational sector will not simply adopt AI, it will embrace it as a catalyst for enhancement. But I think the key there is the word enhancement.

It augments things. It’s really amazing at generating big data sets. And you know, that’s what it does.

I don’t think we could ever hope to compete with that. But again, getting back to the hope that there can be a relationship between AI and education that is symbiotic. So I guess what I mean by that is sort of a balancing act where technology supports, not just supports, but actually amplifies the irreplaceable human qualities that drive effective teaching and learning.

And as AI continues to evolve, I’m excited about the possibilities it presents, I guess, for enriching education and empowering students and teachers. But I’m very much aware that we can’t deny that it’s here. But I’m also very wary of outsourcing crucial things like differentiation for control and linguistic diversity to AI, without actually understanding the fundamental knowledge on which we have to base our judicious use of lesson planning.

Brynn: I love that answer. I think that that’s a perfect summary of where we’re at and where, hopefully, we are headed. So, Sue, thank you so much for talking with me today, and thank you for being on the show.

Dr Ollerhead: It’s been a pleasure, Brynn. Thanks so much.

Brynn: And thank you for listening, everyone. If you liked listening to our chat today, please subscribe to the Language on the Move Podcast, leave a five-star review on your podcast app of choice, and recommend the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner, the New Books Network, to your students, colleagues, and friends. Until next time.

Migration separates families

I am a second generation migrant from my mother’s side. When my grandfather migrated from the former Czechoslovakia to Australia after World War 2, only one member of his immediate family was a fellow survivor, his older brother. The brothers were desperate to get out of war-torn Europe and start a new life, but there was a catch. They weren’t able to go to the same place. While my grandfather received permission to emigrate with his young family to Sydney, his brother received the same from the United States. Despite already losing their parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins in the war, the brothers were unable to prevent losing each other. After they emigrated, although they wrote letters, and spoke on the phone very rarely, they never saw each other again.

Today in Australia where I live and work, cross-border communication is likely to be by phone, not letter and for the majority of migrants the greatest barrier to seeing family is likely to be economic. Many of the participants I spoke to for my research into mixed language couples living in Sydney frequently spoke to family members by phone, sometimes even daily. This is significantly more affordable now than it was fifty years ago. However, migrant families continue to be separated for many years and often permanently. The border closures during the pandemic were a very difficult period for migrants unable to travel to spend time with family, particularly aging parents and relatives. So how does communication maintain family ties across borders? And how can we as scholars engage with this topic, theoretically, methodologically and ethically?

A theory of communicative care

I was recently lucky enough to speak to Dr Lynnette Arnold about her new book on this topic, Living together across borders: communicative care in transnational Salvadorean families. In the book she describes how communicative care both sustains and resists dominating geo-political forces which maintain continued migration from El Salvador to the United States across multiple generations as solution to meeting the economic needs of the nation.

In the book Arnold details an analytical approach based on the concept of  communicative care. By this she means that the everyday communication which families engage in is an enactment of care, and that this care is “the most fundamental way that transnational families maintain collective intergenerational life in the face of continued, and seemingly endless, separation.” (p.6) She uses the term convivencia or living together, to describe the culturally specific practices she observed in her data collection with transnational Salvadoran families.

I found communicative care a particularly useful lens for examining the links between what are sometimes referred to as local or micro practices and processes and their connection to larger macro processes such as the economic and political systems governing nations. An example of this is the role of communication in maintaining the flow of global remittances which support the Salvadorean economy as well as the individual families. In this sense the book is a powerful tool for researchers who are interested in both a nuanced exploration of language practices in context and in the transformational power of research to speak back to hegemonic forces such as borders, global capitalism and neoliberalism.

Participants as researchers: researchers as participants

This study took a two stage approach to collecting the data. Starting with a lengthy ethnographic study of a village in El Salvador where she lived and worked as a young women, Arnold built up relationships with two transnational families. These families then formed the research participants for the second stage of the study, where four months worth of telephone conversations between migrant and non-migrant family members were recorded.

This stage centred the agency of the participants themselves by training them as data collectors of the recorded phone calls between transnational family members. In the interview, Dr Arnold discusses how she also employed research assistants from El Salvador who recognised the social identities – as well as the language varieties – of the research participants. This facilitated their contributions, both as accurate transcribers of the audio data but also as cultural informants in the data analysis process.

The ethics of working with migrants and language issues

For those of us working in the field of migration and language, how can we behave ethically in a space where there are profoundly unequal power relations, the stakes are high and global tensions continue to bubble around issues of migration, borders and citizenship? This is especially true for scholars like me, who are not first generation migrants themselves and thus speak from a relatively privileged position.

According to Arnold, we can start by asking what is language doing? How does it connect with the relational aspect of people’s lives and the geopolitical contexts they exist in? Thinking critically about the role of language in creating social reality allows us to become informed advocates for linguistic diversity. It enables us to think about issues of access, inclusion and ultimately social justice.

I’ll leave you with one example from the book’s conclusion which I found particularly compelling due to my own research interests into the links between language maintenance in migrant families and second language education. Arnold makes the point that one way we can support transnational families to maintain networks of communicative care is to change existing educational language policy “which all too often functions as a tool of state-sponsored family separation by pushing the children of migrants towards monolingualism in dominant languages like English” (p. 171). Instead of turning bilinguals into monolingual, language in education policy must be guided by what migrant families themselves need, which is the communicative resources to maintain ties across borders. This includes a recognition of the linguistic variety in migrant repertoires, which extend way beyond standard languages.

Reference

Arnold, L. (2024). Living Together Across Borders: Communicative Care in Transnational Salvadoran Families. Oxford University Press.

Related content

Piller, I. (2018). Globalization between crime and piety. Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/globalization-crime-piety/
Weiss, F. (2012). Christmas in Nicaragua. Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/christmas-in-nicaragua/

Transcript

Hanna Torsh: Welcome to the Language on the move podcast, a channel on the new books network, my name is Hannah Torsh, and I’m a lecturer in linguistics and applied linguistics at Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. My guest today is Dr. Lynette Arnold, Dr. Lynette Arnold is an assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and we’re going to talk about her new monograph living together across borders, communicative care in Transnational Salvadorian Families published by Oxford University Press. Welcome to the show. Lynette.

Lynnette Arnold: Thank you so much. Hi, everybody! Ola.

Hanna Torsh: Can you start us off by telling us a bit about yourself, and how you got interested in the topic of your book?

Lynnette Arnold: Sure! So my book, Living together across borders, explores how members of transnational families find ways to live together despite being separated across borders. The families I work with are from a small rural village in El Salvador, with migrant relatives living in urban locations across the United States. I am not Salvadoran. I do not have Salvadoran family members. So you might wonder, what is it? How did I get involved in this? And my interest in this topic really emerged from 2 different but interrelated personal experiences.

I spent 5 years living in El Salvador from 2,000 to 2,005 during the years when most people are in college. I was living in El Salvador, and this is a really eye opening experience, because I got to know many young people, my age, who had grown up during the Salvadoran Civil War that happened in the 19 eighties, and in getting to know them I learned a lot about the involvement of the Us. Government in perpetuating this 12 year conflict through immense financial support of the Salvadoran military and training Salvadoran soldiers in brutal, scorched Earth tactics. All of these, the ways that us support had really caused a lot of harm in El Salvador, and that was an eye opening experience for me to realize that this big gaping hole in my education as a Us. Citizen not understanding something so vital about my country’s history and involvement in the world.

So that was one inspiration was really to help my fellow citizens better understand the human impact of us foreign policy. Our involvement in the Salvadoran Civil War was a direct cause of the widespread emigration that El Salvador shows still today. And so that was kind of one piece was recognizing that I hadn’t learned these things and wanting to share them with my fellow citizens.

The second experience was sort of more deeply relational, and it has to do with the ways that the relationships I made in El Salvador continued. When I moved back to the United States to go to college. When I moved to the US. I stayed in contact with people in El Salvador through phone calls, and I suddenly found myself part of this transnational network of folks in El Salvador, their relatives here in the United States, who I had met in El Salvador, but who had since migrated, and I started to get really interested in what was happening in those phone calls and all the kinds of complicated things that people were working out on the phone across borders. At the same time, at that moment in my life I was navigating a kind of growing realization or separation from my own family of origin. I had left at that point permanently left the Christian Commune where I was raised, and where my family still lives, so I have a very different reason for separation. But I was navigating in my own life how to be family with people that I wasn’t living together with. And so, though I juxtaposing those 2 experiences, got me really interested in how people do family at a distance and the role of language? So that was really what brought me then to the topic of the book.

Hanna: That’s so fascinating. And just a quick follow up question. You know you talk about living there, living in this rural village at a time when sort of other people were at college. How was that experience of language learning for you at that age, in this very remote community, especially when we consider today how almost how difficult that experience is to have with the new affordances that we have in terms of technology and the reach of technology.

Lynnette Arnold: That’s such a great question. Yeah. So I went to El Salvador, knowing very little Spanish. I had been raised in a kind of bilingual culture with German. So I had German as kind of a heritage language, not for my family, but from my community growing up and understood a lot of German, but went to El Salvador, so I knew how to be bilingual. I didn’t know Spanish. I took 2 weeks of intensive one-on-one Spanish courses in the capital.

And I told the guy, the instructor like this is what’s going to happen. I’m going out to this rural village by myself for the next 4 months like I need to be able to survive in Spanish, and I had a dictionary, and I had a grammar workbook and then I went out into the village. I knew one other person in the country who spoke English, who I saw maybe twice the entire time that I was there. So it was really immersion. I was living with a family. I was trying to figure out how to, you know, support the English teacher who didn’t really speak English, you know, like all of these things while also learning the language. So I think obviously, having already been bilingual, helped me like my brain, knew how to learn language, knew that, like learning, the grammar was helpful, and that then I could be like, oh, that person just used the subjunctive! That’s what it sounds like in real life, you know. I remember having experiences like that.

I think the other thing that came out of that experience for me was that I was really learning the language and the culture at the same time. So it wasn’t that I was learning these abstract grammatical forms, but I was learning how to communicate in the language as a young woman, so that was the other, like the gendered, and age the fact that I was, you know, a Us. Citizen, a foreigner. All of those things I had to learn how to use Spanish in that very kind of accurate, contextual way. And still to this day, when I speak Spanish, I find myself realizing how much that has influenced the way that I speak Spanish today. People are not familiar with my accent. I have a very Salvadoran accent. The vocabulary that I’m most comfortable with is like about farms, and, you know, growing food and animals and raising children and not, you know, academic things. And I think that experience was certainly also influential in shaping my research trajectory and the project of this book, because it made me think a lot about the really close connection between language and culture and the sort of social work that language does.

Hanna Torsh: Yeah, wonderful. I think a lot of our audience can resonate with that experience of finding their voice in another language, and having to learn how to be an identity in that language, and then perhaps shifting to another space, and having to then relearn how to be in that language.

So moving on to your book in your book, you talk about two really important concepts, and I’m interested in hearing what these mean. I think our audience would like to hear about them, too. So the 1st one is this idea of convivencia, or living together, and the other one is the idea of communicative care. Can you explain what these 2 concepts mean, and how you use them in your research and in the book.

Lynnette Arnold: Sure I’ll start with convivencia, because it’s the title of the book. So convivencia is two words; con together, and vivencia, live, so live together, made into one word in Spanish convivence as a noun form. It can be all these different things. It’s really a flexible word. People use it a lot when talking about social life. In El Salvador in general, it’s just a very high frequency word. Convivio is another related noun, that is a word for a gathering. Many different kinds of gatherings can be called convivios.

So, in addition to using the word convivencia a lot. People also spend a lot of time carving out opportunities for convivencia or living together what we might call at least an American lingo hanging out just spending time. So it’s a very common thing in rural Salvador culture to see people sitting around on the patio, kind of intermittently talking. Maybe somebody is doing some husking of corn or some other kind of work is happening. Children are in or out, in or out but that sort of spending time together, talking, hanging out, not doing a whole lot of anything is a really important part of the culture. Sometimes convivencia happens in more formal ways, like big gatherings for birthdays, or, you know, religious celebrations or things like that. But they can also be much more informal.

So when I this really sort of caught my attention in the context of the book project, because when I talk to members of transnational families both in El Salvador and in the United States. Many of them mentioned that they missed the ways that they used to convier with loved ones. So they missed that kind of living together when they were separated across borders. So I heard that truth coming out over and over in the interviews, but at the same time from my research perspective, I was seeing these families still doing a whole heck of a lot of conviviando. Even if they weren’t in the same place, they were still finding ways to live together. So I knew that from participating in the transnational networks that from sort of a research perspective, convivencia was still happening, but families were telling me that it looked different than it did when they lived together.

And so, as part of the kind of participating in these transnational phone conversations. I really started to realize that my intuition about where a lot of this living together was happening was that it was happening in these phone calls and these transnational conversations were a really crucial way that families were still able to live together when they couldn’t be in the same place. So that’s what really got me into thinking about what’s happening with this communication and communication away as a way of being together, living together when you’re separate.

So that seems like, if we want to put a label on it, we could call that the more Emic framing right the more the way that people in the community would understand what’s happening here. Convivencia is probably the label they would put on it. Communicative care is really my term and is kind of more informed by my theoretical considerations. I’m a scholar of language and communication, and I’m very interested in how language acts in the world and what language does. And at that time I had been thinking a lot about and reading a lot about feminist scholarship around care and feminist scholars, writing about care often describe it and define care as the labor or the work that we do to keep ourselves alive as a species. So it’s the work that allows individual and collective well-being and survival.

And I came to feel that what was happening in the conversations was families doing precisely that work through language? So I decided to come up with this idea of communicative care as a theoretical frame to capture what I what I thought the work was that was happening in the Conversations. I also wanted to label for the fact that I saw that care and communication were entangled in some very complex ways, and so I wanted a framework that could capture all of those different ways of entanglement. So I decided the communicative care would be a capacious way to talk about that.

Hanna: So just for our audience to understand, you have talked about those transnational phone calls. So maybe we could just take a step back and you could just describe the actual data that you work with in this book, so that so that we have a context for that.

Lynnette Arnold: The data that I’m working within the book primarily are recordings of transnational phone calls. So they are dyadic, mostly dyadic conversations between a person in the United States and a person in the El Salvador who are related to one another in some way. I have interviews and other kinds of ethnographic data that I use to sort of triangulate. These were conversations that were recorded over a 4 month  period. So in many cases I could track how something developed over time. The conversations involved, although they were dyadic, many different dyads within the family. So I could track how different dyads talked about different issues.

So that’s when I’m saying that the families are doing a lot of this conivencia, this living together through conversations, I was able to see that in recording, these phone calls and paying really close attention to what exactly they were doing when they were talking to each other on the phone and why they spent all of this, you know, effort, money and time to have these regular phone calls with one another.

So I felt the need for a framework, because I wanted something to capture the different ways that language and care were connected. So it was very clear to me that language is something that makes other kinds of care possible. So think about many kinds of care that we all engage in on, you know, part of our everyday lives. Language is absolutely central to those for these families. The money that immigrants send home is probably the form of care that most people associate with transnational families. That is not possible without communication. There’s a lot of communicative work that goes into making those remittances, those economic transfers happen. But beyond that I wanted to show. And I show in the in the book that language enacts care. Language is something that does itself do care work. It’s a way of maintaining and forging the kind of relational bedrock that is the foundation of all other kinds of care. So that was really important to me to draw that out. That language is not just facilitating other care, but that it is itself a kind of care. And then also, as we know, scholars of language know, language is always making meaning. So as it’s facilitating remittances. And as it’s enacting relational care, language is also a way that people. I used to create meetings about like what kinds of actions, when carried out, by which people count as care and which things don’t count? So all those things are sort of entangled and happening at the same time. So with a communicative care perspective, I was really trying to come up with a theoretical and analytical way to approach that and fully grapple with what was happening with this communication. And the book demonstrates ultimately that communicative care.

This approach really sheds light on how transnational families are able to forge convivencia and live together across borders, through language when they can’t be at the same place for many years at a time.

Hanna Torsh: One of the things that I found really fantastic about reading your work is that the approach you took to data collection, this very inclusive, very participant centered approach to data collection. Could you tell us a bit about how you approached the methodology in your work, and why?

Lynnette Arnold: Sure. And I want to answer this question in a way that will be helpful to emerging scholars who are maybe formulating their first research project or anybody embarking on a new research project. Because, as we know, things often don’t go to plan when we’re doing research. In fact, they often tend not to go to plan but really, if my research had gone to plan, I would not have the book that I have.

So that’s the kind of message here that things can go differently than you imagine, and still be great. So my project started off as a very traditional ethnographic. Sort of like an ethnography of communication. In that tradition I did a lot of participant observation in El Salvador and in the United States with family members, spending time in their homes, eating meals with them, hanging out on the weekends, trying to go to their workplaces, going to their schools. Just kind of spending time understanding what was happening in their lives. And then I conducted interviews with members of families in both countries. And I had that, you know, interview data that I recorded and started to analyze, and, you know, have some other work about narratives that were told in those interviews, for instance.

And then I was planning to do a longer stint in El Salvador of sort of more intensive ethnographic research, and really tracking what was happening. Over an intensive period of time in El Salvador. But then things beyond my control happened. Things got very dangerous in El Salvador. So this was in 2,014 which was a time when there was an intense spike in organized crime and gang violence, especially targeting young people. And there was a whole crisis of unaccompanied minors coming across the Us. Mexico border in relation to this and the area where I do. My research is kind of on a line between the territory of two gangs and got incredibly dangerous.

So my advisor felt like it was really unsafe for me to go back and spend a long time in El Salvador, and she was probably right. So I had to pivot and I decided to pivot to a project that was much more focused on the transnational communication.

So I ended up focusing on the phone calls and deciding to work with two extended families that I had. I knew the most members of and had the deepest relationships to. And I worked with them to record phone calls that they made across borders over a period of 4 months. I based on the interviews I had a sense of from the interviews how much people spent on phone calls per month, and I gave families this kind of stipend per month to cover the costs of the communication during the time that the recording was happening, and then I also hired research assistants in in each family. These were in both cases young people living in the United States because I was able to get to them and train them. So these were young people who were more tech savvy, who were literate and who crucially didn’t have tons of family obligations like they weren’t parents yet and so I was able to go visit them and train them in how to use the recording technology. I used a very, very simple earpiece recorder that you just held the phone up to. I had a little carrying thing for the recorder, so people could still walk around on their cell phones. These were all cell phone calls while having a little MP. 3 recorder on the kind of in their holster

And the family decided amongst themselves which calls to record. And then they didn’t necessarily have to pass all the recordings on to me. They could delete data if they wanted to. I still did delete some things that were passed on to me that I felt, especially when they were pertaining to people’s immigration situation. That I felt like legally, I didn’t want to be responsible for having that information. So I just deleted those recordings.

So that was the sample that I got was the things that families, you know felt okay about me having. And I was still surprised. You know they still felt very from my experience, participating in these networks, very authentic conversations. And there’s conflict. And there’s, you know, disagreements. There are things that happen in these calls. So I I would definitely say it’s not a entirely representative sample in that. Maybe, like the most extreme cases of conflict were not recorded, or whatever but I didn’t get the sense, either, that people were like consistently, always on their best behavior on these phone calls, for instance, it felt like they had. You know they were kind of in the habit of doing this.

Hanna: What did you then do with the with the recordings that you had. How did you go about analyzing that data?

Lynnette Arnold: Yeah. So this is another thing that many of us who do language research, you know, end up with hours and hours of recorded data, and we want to look at it closely, and it gets really overwhelming. So one thing I did that I learned from my undergraduate advisor, Mary Bucholz, was, instead of transcribing all my data. First, st I did a 1st pass of doing what’s called an in what she calls an index, which I think, is a good term. So you’re making a time stamped kind of account of what is happening every minute or so. 30 seconds, depending on how fast moving. The data is in the call, and that is a good way to listen through your data. And just what is in there, what’s happening. Get it in your head right in a way that maybe transcribing especially. This was obviously in the time before AI. But I know now lots of people are using AI to do a 1st pass on transcription. It’s not getting the data in your head in the same way. So working through an index is really good because it makes you start to see the patterns so indexing allowed me to do some qualitative sort of coding of what were some communicative patterns that I started to see what were. Think, what were things that people were doing over and over and over and over again? And decided to focus on transcribing, then, examples of those things that were happening a lot, and you’ll see if you read the book that there’s a chapter about greetings. That’s a thing that happens a lot in these phone calls. And by an example of greetings. There is a chapter about negotiating remittances which is also a thing that’s probably the thing that happens for most of the time.

And then there’s a chapter about remembering in conversations kind of reminiscing in conversations, which was one that I hadn’t, you know. It wasn’t 1 that I went in looking for necessarily but jumped out at me as something really powerful that was happening in these conversations. I was really fortunate.

During my graduate time, when I was collecting and preparing the data to be able to work with undergraduate research assistants. All of whom were Salvador of Salvadoran descent, which meant that they had the linguistic capability to understand this variety of Spanish I think at one time I tried to work with a Mexican descent student, and they were just like this. Spanish is so different from the Spanish that I’m familiar with. I don’t think I can transcribe this accurately. So it was a lovely, lovely opportunity to also extend mentoring towards you know, 1st generation largely Salvadoran American students who were an amazing help for me as well in doing the transcription, and they are all named in my acknowledgements.

Hanna Torsh: Excellent. Yeah, that’s that’s a real challenge for us here in Australia, because we are so linguistically diverse. Having that match with research support in terms of linguistic repertoire.

Lynnette Arnold: And I think even in doing the transcriptions we would meet to talk about the transcriptions. But our conversations would diverge just from the actual transcript. And they would say things like, Oh, my mom. Salvi, mom, this is a thing my mom does all the time. Or, you know, topics of conversations. They were all parts of, you know, transnational families as well. So it was really enriching, not just in the transcriptions, but also in helping me to recognize that what I had in my data was something that was broader than just the two families I was working with.

Hanna Torsh: In your book, you talk about the contradictory ways that digital communication has impacted on the families that you worked with, but also on transnational and cross border family communication generally. So could you tell us a bit about what you found out about these contradictions for your research participants, and any examples that you had would be also fascinating to hear.

Lynnette Arnold: I think there’s kind of a couple of possible answers here. And I think I’ll go with. There’s like a technology answer. And then there’s like a social life answer. And I think we maybe can do both. The technology answers that we often assume that like newer technology, more inclusive, like video technology is better and that people will default to using technologies that are more complete. So if families have access to video calling, they will use video calling, for instance, research with transnational families beyond mine. But just within the field of transnational family research has found that video calling can actually be very emotionally challenging and costly for people to engage in, and that sometimes people dis prefer, even if they have access to videos, that they prefer other forms of communication. So I argue in my work that for these families, phone calls are a real sweet spot. Because they don’t require as mo as much emotional investment. I mean, imagine yourself as a parent or as a family member separated from your loved one for years at a time. You see them on screen, and you see in real time that they’re different than they were when you were there with them. So it’s a real physical visceral reminder of the passing of time that you’re not together. On the phone that is a little bit more held at bay. But you still have the intimacy of somebody’s voice, and you can really hear all of those cues of emotion and all of those things that are so important, especially in the sort of delicate communication that families are doing often on the phone.

Phone calls are also very accessible. So I think that’s another thing to think about in terms of technology is like, and the family is who within the family can use a given technology and phone calls for the families I worked with were maximally inclusive because preliterate children can still talk on the phone and also in the families I worked with elders, and the families were often not literate or had very low literacy levels, and certainly did not have technological literacy to know how to navigate something more complex than a phone call. So phone calls were really a sweet spot, both kind of relationally and what they allowed but also because of their accessibility to everybody within the family. So talk a little bit about that in the book. Why, phone calls in this era of all polymedia. I felt the need to talk about that. It also had to do with the fact that smartphone technology hadn’t really entered El Salvador quite yet. Now it has but I still talk on the phone to my comrade. The mother of my goddaughter in the El Salvador we sell each other voice memos on Whatsapp. So you know again, you see that kind of preference for the voice communication over over video, even though it’s now more possible than it used to be.

And then there’s another answer that has to do with what digital communication affords for these families in terms of their relationships. So as I’ve been talking already, on the one hand, communication is absolutely vital. It’s the way that families are able to live together and sustain their relationships across border. It’s a means of emotional support. It forges the groundwork for this ongoing economic support like remittances. So it’s really positive things for families. But we also know from transnational family scholarship in general that digital communication for families can be really charged. It can lead to people feeling surveilled or micromanaged, especially children and women in families.

In my book, I found that kind of the the negative consequences or effects of digital communication were the ways that it perpetuated divides between migrants and non migrants within families. So if you think about a transnational family, you’ve got this big division of people living in different countries, and the migrants are perceived as those with access to more resources, and the non migrants as those with less access to resources who need help from their migrant. This is kind of a pretty broad generalization that holds for most transnational families, I think.

And what I found in my research was that this divide played out in communication, so that in family conversations there were very different communicative expectations placed on people depending on if they were migrants or non migrants. So, for instance, non migrants needed to learn that when they needed remittances they shouldn’t just ask. They shouldn’t just say, Hey, can you send me 100 bucks?

But they should tell these elaborate stories about family life in El Salvador, in which they would embed conversations of somebody else complaining to somebody else about needing money. So this very like indirect, layered way that people learned a very specific way of doing like a remittance request right?

And then, if you zoom out to think at the kind of macro level. This kind of communication is sustaining and shoring up migration right? It sustains the transnational family form. It keeps the remittances flowing so from a nation perspective, it makes migration succeed as an escape valve, as a means of generating revenue through migrant migrant remittances. Right? So in that those ways, we can see that the communication is really shoring up some inequalities right at the interpersonal and kind of the global level.

Even as it’s a lifeline for these families. So both of those things are true at the same time. And I just want to kind of end by saying it isn’t the case that communication only re in reinscribes inequalities. There are. There are ways in which communication also opens up space for people to resist and create, create new ways of doing things.

Hanna Torsh: Yeah, I’m I’m really keen to hear if you could tell us about some of the participants that you talk about in the book, and some examples of those ways of maybe either kind of perpetuating those inequalities or resisting those inequalities.

Lynnette Arnold: Yeah, I think I’ll go with the resisting examples, because they’re more interesting to me.

Hanna Torsh: Sure.

Lynnette Arnold: So one thing that’s really interesting about digital communication is that it opens up ways for young people to participate in family communication. So some transnational family research shows that young people are actually really get involved in family communication because they have to be the tech. And they’re let the tech help, you know, and then they’re there helping grandma with the laptop or whatever, and then they participate in the conversation. In my families, I found that the kind of a polymedia kind of situation where there were phone calls, but also other kinds of technology happening. Between family members opened up some conflict. So in this one case, some young men were being raised by their grandparents in El Salvador, and their dad was in the United States. He sent them a laptop. They opened Facebook accounts. They started messaging their dad on Facebook. Their grandparents are not literate. Their grandparents are not tech literate. They have no idea like what’s happening when their sons are on the laptop and so the sons use this kind of private channel of communication to complain to their dad about some stuff like teenagers do right.

Hanna Torsh: Yes, I do. Yes.

Lynnette Arnold: As they do and the dad was just hearing from them about this, and so then he called his parents, and, you know, kind of scolded them, taking his son’s word as like you know the truth rather than realizing that it was just kind of one perspective on what was happening. And this resulted in a lot of conflict within the family that then got resolved by multiple phone calls from multiple people, in which people then navigated and kind of smooth things over, and he eventually called and apologized to his mother for not understanding the situation more clearly. But so there there was a case where young people were using technology to kind of have more agency right in what’s going on in the family and try to pressure, you know, put some weight on the scales in terms of things coming out in the way that they wanted it to come out. The other example that I I like to talk about and think about is about gender. So we haven’t talked about gender yet, but it is a theme throughout the book. We know from feminist work that women around the world do the lion’s share of care in pretty much every context you can think of, and that is also true in communication.

I do have cases of men doing amazing communicative care work, a lot of like really touching emotional communication between men. So this is not to say that men are not doing the work. But one thing that I find is that women get asked to do kind of the most onerous tasks. So if a report about oh, the migrants sent money for the cornfield, and there was a flood, and all the corn seedlings died, and we need more money so that we can replant women get asked to have that conversation, even though agriculture isn’t traditionally feminine domain. But they get asked to kind of communicate that information and take on that less pleasant communicative burden. But what I found in some cases was that sometimes women were then using that that they were put in this kind of conduit position to migrants. They were using that to kind of carve out more space for themselves within family decision making. So in one instance, the father in El Salvador had sold one of the family’s cows. He had not consulted with his daughter, his eldest daughter, who lived with him in El Salvador about this decision, and she was kind of mad that he hadn’t consulted with him. But then he this was the same corn example. He needed her to talk to her brother in the United States, his son, and, you know, get some money for the corn so he came over at one night and asked her to do that the next time her brother called to ask him for more money so that they could replant I happened to be there when the brother called, and she didn’t say anything, but instead she told all about the cow, and how her brother had, how her dad had sold the cow without consulting with her, and how it was a poor decision and a waste of the family’s resources and blah blah, and that she should be consulted. So really getting a kind of word into the migrants. And then, when her Dad came back the next day to see what had happened. And what if the money was coming? She was like? Well, I didn’t tell him about it, because, you know, if I’m not consulted on things, I I can’t. You know I can’t communicate. So she really kind of used her. She was in this pivot Lynch kind of PIN position communicatively, and she used that to try to press for a like more decision, making power within the family in these kind of agricultural domains that traditionally, in traditional kind of salvadorange roles would not have been within her purview. So those are the kinds of things, and I think there were more of those things happening than I saw where people were using women especially. We’re using communication to do this kind of torquing in the mechanical sense of gender roles and kind of incrementally shifting things a little bit. So all that’s to say, I think that there are.

There were other ways to in which people were using communication to resist. So I in my, in my account, I wanted to kind of resist. One size fits all characterization of what was happening here, and really capture the complexity of communication as a wonderful lifeline for these families, but also as reproducing inequalities, and also maybe sometimes allowing for resistance, especially to gender them, and generational hierarchies within families.

Hanna Torsh: That’s wonderful. It’s a great example it kind of reminds me of also the the kind of dual role of women in households where they have to do the bulk of the domestic labor, but that also affords them a certain amount of power over some decisions. And so it’s often hard to for them to give it up, because that is then their only power traditionally, in the in those sorts of family situations. So I think that’s a yeah. And it’s really interesting, the way that intersects them with the digital world. And how the same sort of negotiations are taking place. So like, Okay, well, if this is my job, then I am going to try and carve out more agency for myself in a system where I have less agency, you know a patriarchal system. So yeah. Oh, look I I would love to talk more with you, but I am have to jump to my last question. And and and make it really open for you. I I think one of the one of the things that you talk about in your book is how you’re essentially interested in, in, as you say, providing a much more contradictory and nuanced picture of particularly transnational migrants when they have been traditionally particularly, you know, in in public discourse, cast as victims and and and really there’s been a lot of focus on the negative. So I guess I would like to ask you, you know, what? What did you? What are the key? Things that you would really like? The key findings. You would like emerging and established researchers in linguistic diversity and in transnational migrants, to take away from your wonderful book.

Lynnette Arnold: Thank you. I’ll start with a linguistic diversity piece. And I just the I cannot say strongly enough that we cannot. We can’t study linguistic diversity without also be thinking, thinking about what language is doing. So linguistic diversity cannot be separated from the function of language. What people are doing with their communication and the context in which they’re doing those things really shape what linguistic diversity does and what it’s made of. So it’s really vital to think about. One of the main things that people are doing with their communication always is relational. They’re doing relational work of all kinds, with family members, with bosses, with everybody. Right? We’re constantly managing relationships through our language. And so we need to think about that. And also the kind of geopolitical context within which those relationships are playing out. So this may get to your question about language maintenance. Actually, because I wanted to talk here for a little bit about the children of migrants in the United States. So I noticed in my research that the children of migrants in the Us. Were largely excluded from transnational communication.

This was not the case for children in El Salvador, who participated quite actively in and were trained actively trained to participate in the transnational communication, as I show in my chapter on Greetings. That shows how kids learn even before they’re verbal. They’re taught how to do these greetings.

So why does that happen? Well? Linguistic diversity is part of an answer to the question. Relatives in El Salvador tended to perceive the children of migrants in the US as not being Spanish speakers, and therefore they perceived the language barrier that kept them from communicating with grandchildren, nieces, nephews.

Whatever the relationship was, there are, of course, language barrier issues here. There are educational issues at play. Many of the children in the United States did not have access to bilingual education in Spanish and English, and obviously the social dominance of English, certainly reduced Spanish fluency for some, at least, some of the children, but many of the children who were perceived in El Salvador as monolingual English speakers would actually be characterized as bilingual. They just didn’t speak Salvadoran Spanish. They spoke US Spanish, which is a variety of Spanish that has large has been in contact with English right for a long period of time. And so it’s grammar. Its vocabulary is shaped by English and so I think that the unfamiliarity of the children Spanish was perceived by some relatives in El Salvador and this dialect difference was perceived as a as a full on language, barrier, and led to to children being excluded.

So the linguistic causes of children’s kind of exclusion from family communication were really complicated. But it’s also important to recognize that their exclusion from this communication was also influenced by non linguistic, relational and structural issues. So when families envision their future generations down. You know they envision the future of continued emigration, of continuing. So today’s children in El Salvador are tomorrow’s future immigrants. And so it was really essential for children in El Salvador to be heavily socialized into being members of transnational and families to being committed to these cross border relationships, because they would then be the ones to carry those seeds with them. When they traveled the children of migrants are seen as kind of less predictable sustainers of transnational families like well, they just really weren’t sure what was going to happen with these kids.

They weren’t sure they were going to stay committed to the family, so they were less pro. Those relationships were less prioritized in the kind of communicative care work that families were sustaining across borders. The relationship with children in the in the Us. Just wasn’t a priority. Because of this way of thinking about right and this way of understanding their future makes a lot of sense from a geopolitical perspective. It’s heartbreaking.

But I think, unfortunately, realistic reading of the inequitable global distribution of resources, and that for families to get access to those resources. People are gonna have to keep migrating right? So what this example shows us is that the kind of linguistic, the relational, the geopolitical, are all like really tightly entwined with each other. So I just want this example to sort of be a call for us as researchers of linguistic diversity, to be able to think on all of these scales at once, and to think about their interconnections.

And for me, thinking about what language is doing in the world for people. What people are doing with their language is a way to get at that and the lens of care has been a really for me a very capacious lens that has allowed me to think about the relational and interpersonal and the geopolitical kind of within the same framework and their interrelationships. So that’s really my big takeaway for kind of language researchers. Is to think about what language is doing?

I think I have takeaways that are kind of more broad for people living in a global world, which is all of us. Now. And I think I want to especially speak to readers who may not themselves be migrant to listeners right who may not be migrants themselves may not be the children of migrants themselves. And just say that it’s really important for us to understand the lived experiences of migrants. They are so integral to maintaining our societies today. But their lives do not stop at our borders. You know they have connections that go, you know, far beyond what we can see in terms of what we think is happening with migrants and what their lives are like. So this is just kind of a call for all of us to think about, how can we establish relationships with the migrants that are in our communities? And start to think about? You know what’s happening in their lives? Beyond, you know, our immediate communities, our immediate national context.

To think about also the policies and that our governments are passing their foreign policy, their immigration policy, and how that’s affecting lots of people far beyond our national borders through these transnational family connections. So again, that’s kind of going full circle back to where I started of like wanting to educate us citizens about El Salvador. Just to say that there’s so much more that we need to be aware of as you know in thinking about migrants and the roles that they play in the world. And really, yeah, wanted to make sure that they ultimately, I think what I call for my book is that migrants? I want a world where people can have full self determination over how they choose to live as a family. And that is not true for most of us in today’s world. But it is really not true for transnational families. They do not necessarily want to live in 2 different countries for decades at a time, with no chance to visit each other. And so ultimately. That’s where I end. The book is just to say, like, What can we do? How can we work in our own individual ways? For a world in which people have more self determination over care in their own. Of all kinds, including communication.

Hanna Torsh: Oh, thank you so much. I think that’s such an important message and a a great place to finish, a great message to end with. The idea of self-determination for families. And yeah, absolutely reminding us that this we might find all of this very fascinating. But of course, this is not something that any family wants. It’s kind of decade, long separation. And I really love the idea of imploring non migrants to think about migrants, and to that idea of not finishing their lives, not ending at the borders. So yeah, thank you so much.

We’d like to thank you again for talking to us about your work. We will put a link in the blog to the book. Thanks everyone for listening to us today, and if you enjoyed the show, please subscribe to our channel, leave a 5 star review on your podcast app of choice and recommend the language on the move podcast and our partner, the new books network to your students, colleagues and friends. Thanks. Again, Lynette.

Lynnette Arnold: Thank you so much for having me. It’s been a real pleasure to talk to you today.

Hanna Torsh: Thank you until next time.

When: Thursday, December 14, 2023, full day
Where: Macquarie University
Keynote speakers:
Dr Alexandra Grey, University of Technology Sydney
Dr Trang Nguyen, University of Melbourne

What: Despite the ever-increasing linguistic diversity of Australian society, our institutions continue to be organized as monolingual spaces. This creates barriers to full and equitable social participation for those who do not speak English, do not speak it well, or have low levels of (English) literacy. At this point in time, research into language barriers to education, work, healthcare, law, and all aspects of social life faces at least three intertwined conceptual and methodological challenges, which this workshop is designed to explore:

1. Emerging languages: some of the fastest-growing communities in Australia include speakers of under-served, under-resourced, and non-standardized languages. This raises significant challenges for the provision of language services, from translation and interpreting to heritage language maintenance and community schooling.
2. Language technologies: the past few years have seen an explosion in assistive language technologies from automated translation via multilingual chatbots to digital diasporas. These technologies offer fresh opportunities for linguistic inclusion while also creating new barriers for linguistically minoritized populations.
3. Epistemic justice: the open science movement challenges us to rethink the research life cycle from design to dissemination. Co-design, data-sharing, multilingual team research, big data, and citizen science are some of the issues reshaping how we approach linguistic diversity and social participation.

The workshop is designed to be highly interactive and we are particularly interested in hearing from HDR candidates and early career researchers working in these areas. We have a small number of short presenter slots (10-15 minutes) on our panels. To have your abstract considered for presentation, submit here by Monday, November 06.

Attendance is free.

***

‘The Glory’, a Korean drama, has ranked the top among the ten most watched TV and films since its release on March 10, 2023 on Netflix. The Glory has received 1.82 billion views on Weibo, the second largest Chinese social media platform at the time of writing this blog. Chinese youths, the largest group of Weibo members, are enthusiastic about discussing the plot, sharing their memes about this drama, and picking up popular terms for fandom communication.

Over the past two decades, Korean cultural products such as dramas, movies, music and dance, food, cosmetics etc. have gained worldwide popularity, and the global spread of Korean culture is known as Hallyu or Korean Wave (한류). Hallyu has been promoted by the South Korean government as cultural diplomacy and soft power projection since the 1997 financial crisis. The global promotion of Hallyu turns out to be a huge success. There are about 51.74 million population in South Korea, but the number of Hallyu community members reaches over 156 million people across the globe. China constitutes over half of the fan community with over 86 million.

As Hallyu emerges as a global cultural consumption among young people particularly in China, learning Korean has rapidly carved out a niche market for China’s youth to craft their subjectivities and produce bundles of skills. Mr. Bin He, a postgraduate student at Yunnan University under the supervision of Professor Jia Li, has conducted an ethnography with four Chinese university students on how relevant practices and discourses socialize Chinese youths to align themselves with learning Korean through self-study and out of class channels.

Even though China has the largest number of students learning English as a compulsory course, Chinese youths do not necessarily see English as the only source for empowerment and upward mobility. Chinese students who are economically and linguistically under-privileged find it more useful and easier to learn to speak ‘small languages’ (as we previously discussed here and here). This is exactly what happened to Bin’s participants who major in English but found it more desirable and promising to invest into learning Korean and dreamed of taking up Korean-related jobs.

Performing cool posture

Chinese youths develop their initial incentive to learn Korean because of their desire to get close to their Korean idols and their orientation to be part of a Korean-oriented consumption style. The digitization between China and South Korea facilitates such transnational communication. By subscribing to a paid app (about 5 $) per month, Chinese youths can get in contact with their Korean idols by listening to their voices or reading their updates online on a daily basis. They also choose to spend about 20$ collecting a Korean album imported from South Korea to show their distinct cultural taste.

Ming’s Weibo post

Their affective attachment to the Hallyu community gets closer through their interactions with other Hallyu fans on public and private social media platforms. Ming, one of Bin’s participants, has been learning Korean by himself for over six years. Like many Hallyu fans, Ming has developed basic Korean proficiency by watching Korean dramas and variety shows and listening to Korean songs. To test his Korean proficiency and to enhance his reading competence, Ming took up a volunteer job translating Korean idols’ stories into Chinese on Weibo for Chinese fans to keep updated with their idols. In addition to being recognized as a legitimate member of the Hallyu community because of his Korean proficiency, Ming also likes to share his consumption of Korean lifestyle on Weibo.

The screenshot captures Ming’s enjoyment with his friends drinking 참이슬 (“Chamisul”), the most popular brand of Korean liquor that frequently appears in Korean dramas, TV series, and variety shows. 참이슬 is recontextualized as symbolic source styling himself as someone cool and authentic. Using English ‘talk with’ indicates both modernity and the imagined engagement with the Korean world as Ming told us in interview: “感觉喝着烧酒，仿佛喝着烧酒就置身于韩剧中。” (“I feel like drinking soju, it’s like I’m physically in a Korean drama while drinking soju.”)

Consuming desire

Longing is one of the most featured themes in Korean dramas. The filming locations of hit Korean dramas are often promoted as must-go destinations for Chinese tourists travelling to South Korea. For Chinese youths who are living and studying in China, love stories constitute an important part of their romantic imagination as reported by Fang, a Chinese female university student: “想去首尔学习生活，去看看电视剧里出现的各种场景。” (“I dream of studying and living in Seoul. I want to visit the featured locations that appear in Korean dramas.”

Fang’s post

As someone who was born and brought up in the hinterland, Fang has grown up with the imagination of the sea, and the sea is often depicted as semiotic potential for romance in Korean dramas. Fang expressed her sense of attachment to 갯마을 차차차 (Hometown Cha-Cha-Cha), a romantic story in a small coastal village. She posted a moment on her Chinese social media in Korean: “아~듣기만 해도 바다 냄새 맡은 것 같애” (“Wow～ Just listening [to the song in Hometown Cha-Cha-Cha] I feel like the smell of the sea”).

Fang’s sense of enjoyment and desire is also expressed by her semiotic and linguistic choices. Using tilde ‘～’ after ‘wow’ (아) emphasizes her desire and longing. The choice of using Korean indexes her sense of feeling distinct and unique compared to her Chinese peers who might understand English but who are unlikely to be able to read Korean.

Crafting a niche in learning Korean

Ad for Korean online classes

Both Ming and Fang started to learn Korean online through various apps after they had been exposed to Hallyu for some time. Their desire to seriously invest in learning Korean took a clearer form when they saw an ad for online classes:

Why learn a small language
Korean

• The most accessible second foreign language. You will be surrounded by Korean from the moment you turn on your app.

• There are about 70% of Chinese words in Korean. Korean is the language that sounds like ancient Chinese. Chinese students learning Korean do not start from zero.

• Cheap tuition fee for overseas study. The best choice for the working-class family.

• Advanced educational system with the combination of the East and the West and world-leading IT shipping industry, mass communication, e-sports etc. All of these advantages can provide Korean learners with more opportunities.

In contrast to the way Chinese youths learn English, learning Korean has been discursively constructed as ‘accessible’, ‘easy’, ‘affordable’ and ‘advanced’. This promotion discourse is particularly attractive to those who cannot afford to travel to Western countries and who are fed up with the exam-driven learning style in English. As confessed by Ming, “我就是不知道为什么我对好莱坞电影、美剧不感兴趣，我想可能是讨厌英语总是考试吧” (“I just don’t know why I didn’t have any interest in watching Hollywood movies or American TV series. I guess it’s because I was tired of taking English exam.”)

Feeling cosmopolitan

After two years of formal training at a language school, Ming decided to take the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK), and pursue her master’s degree in South Korea after her graduation from an English department in China. When she prepared her application documents, she worked as an English tutor for a Korean family where she taught two children English in Korean. Because of her capacity in Korean, Fang was able to communicate with the Korean mother about her children’s English performance, which in turn facilitated her Korean oracy. Over two years, Fang used the money she earned by working as an English teacher to pay for her Korean language test and tuition fee for Ewha Womans University.

Fang’s chat

In September 2022, Fang started her postgraduate study online due to the restricted travel policy and the Covid-19 pandemic. Fang was eager to go to South Korea and socialize with local people to fulfill her Korean dream. While doing her online classes, she liked to share with her WeChat friends her Korean learning experiences.

The image in Fang’s chat shows the official promotion image of her Korean university with the blooming cherry flowers and one of its famous buildings. By re-posting this world-famous university, Fang also displays her privileged access to advanced education in Seoul, a cosmopolitan city with all her imagination for study and lifestyle in South Korea, as commented by her post “나한테 이게 학교아냐 자유다” (“To me, this is not only a school but also freedom.”) It is worth noting that Fang’s choice of studying in South Korea is partly due to her unwillingness to follow a planned life trajectory by working as an English teacher in her hometown like her peers. Despite her parents’ disagreement with her decision, Fang gave up working as an English teacher and chose to take the risk of investing into an unknown future with Korean.

Becoming entrepreneurial

Apart from desire and cosmopolitanism, Hallyu also displays a strong embodiment of neoliberal discourse upon individuals. Both Ming and Fang have been nurtured by entrepreneurial discourses while exposing themselves to Hallyu. Self-entrepreneurial ethos prevails in many Korean songs, books, and movies. Growing up with Hallyu for over 10 years, Chinese fans have witnessed the ups-and-downs of their idols and have been encouraged by their positive and never-give-up spirits, as Ming shared: “一直喜欢她(Taeyeon),我能从她身上看到许多积极的能量，情绪低落的时候，我就会听听她的歌或是刷刷她舞台表演的视频。” (“I’ve been one of Taeyeon’s fans. I can sense her positive power. When I’m feeling down, I would like to listen to her songs or watch her dancing performance.”)

Ming recalled his struggling experiences when he prepared for his postgraduate entrance exam. For over a year, Ming had to fight alone given that most of his classmates decided to look for a job and very few people including his parents understood his emotional struggles. By listening to Taeyon’s songs, Ming felt understood and comforted. Ming drew strength from witnessing Taeyon’s confrontation with suicide. Taeyon’s re-fashioning herself as someone overcoming her depression became a mental power for Ming to draw from in his own struggles in a competitive and stressful society.

Fang’s post about her Korean readings

Self-regulated and self-enterprising discourses are often circulated on Fang’s social media. Apart from signing up for a gym club and following a healthy lifestyle, Fang also likes to share her reflection on reading Korean novels. The caption about the images of the books she’s reading says: “One section a day; 43 days to finish the book; a story book on life experiences for the youth.”

By purchasing imported reading materials from South Korea, Fang said that she could kill two birds with one stone: enhancing her Korean reading capacity while enriching her life experiences. The philosophical statements of life experiences in the book are mainly self-enterprising and self-driven as indicated by her underlined notes like “너에게 주어지는 기대에 합당한 자기관리를 시작해” (“Start taking care of yourself and meet your expectations”) or “값진 자아 반성 시간” (“the valuable time of self-reflection”).

Navigating between freedom and precarity

Language learning in the digital economy is not problem free. Despite their aspiration to manage their life trajectory through neoliberal promises, Chinese youths find themselves constantly navigating between their desired freedom and structural constraints.

One of the problems that hinder their desire to invest in learning Korean is their lack of time. Chinese youths keep their strong connection with Hallyu but they find it hard to keep learning Korean as learning a language requires consistent and systematic devotion. As English majors at university, they are kept busy by taking exams and getting various certificates to enhance their employment prospects. Two of Bin’s participants imagined that they would have more time for themselves to pick up Korean after they started to work as English teachers in future.

For those who squeeze time and save money to take the TOPIK, their devotion to learning Korean may suffer from anti-Hallyu sentiments due to the diplomatic disputes between China and South Korea. Over the past three decades, the surge of Hallyu has also coincided with several waves of anti-Hallyu movements in China. Ming’s diligence and persistence in learning Korean is not recognized but misunderstood by populist nationalists as “媚韩” (literally, “flattering South Korea”), meaning betraying China and showing allegiance to South Korea.

Publicity shot of Korean star Taeyeon

For Fang who is receiving her master’s degree in South Korea, she is confronted with high living expenses in Seoul and thinking of returning to China to settle down. However, when it comes to her future employment prospect in China, Fang seems to lack of confidence. For one thing, she does not think she can compete against ethnic Korean Chinese for a job position in teaching Korean to Chinese students. For another, her master’s degree in TKSOL is not as desirable as an English major to secure an English teaching position.

By the time of writing up this blog, two of Bin’s participants had to give up learning Korean because of their overwhelming workload and new identity as English teachers. Only Fang and Ming still kept learning Korean. As noted, Fang is doing her master’s degree in South Korea, and Ming has just got a job offer from a Chinese multinational automotive subsidiary targeting the South Korean market. After several months of training, Ming will be sent to South Korea to work for this Chinese company in South Korea.

This study has provided a nuanced understanding of Chinese youths’ Korean language learning experiences in the context of emerging Asian pop culture and digitization. Chinese youths’ learning of Korean is not driven by pragmatic pursuits or academic pressures, but largely rooted in their desire to be part of the Hallyu community. Growing up with Hallyu and learning Korean opened up new spatial and affective imaginations for them to capitalize on their performance and cultural consumption that traverse national boundaries in our digital age. Despite having access to Hallyu and learning Korean through new technological affordances, their pursuit of Korean-related subjectivities gets inculcated with the affective facets of language learning activities rooted in the neoliberal logic of self-management, human capital development and surging populist nationalism.

Related content

Li, J. (2020). Foreign language learning for minority empowerment? Language on the Move. Retrieved from https://languageonthemove.com/foreign-language-learning-for-minority-empowerment/
Li, J. (2021). Esports are the new linguistic and cultural frontier. Language on the Move. Retrieved from https://languageonthemove.com/esports-are-the-new-linguistic-and-cultural-frontier/
Li, J. (2021). Peripheral language learners and the romance of Thai. Language on the Move. Retrieved from https://languageonthemove.com/peripheral-language-learners-and-the-romance-of-thai/
Ma, Y. (2020). Empowerment of Chinese Muslim women through Arabic? Language on the Move. Retrieved from https://languageonthemove.com/empowerment-of-chinese-muslim-women-through-arabic/

Additionally, multilingual crisis communication has been the focus of the research projects conducted by Master of Applied Linguistics students at Macquarie University as part of their “Literacies” unit. We close the year by sharing some of their findings.

In this final post in the series, Claire Livesey shows that children from migrant and refugee families with limited English and limited computer access have been particularly negatively affected by remote learning. She argues that preparing for the needs of vulnerable families during emergencies needs to be incorporated into disaster preparedness.

***

Home-schooling during lockdown is really hard

(Image credit: Glen Carrie via Unsplash)

In mid-March this year, Australian schools began to close in response to the escalating Covid-19 pandemic. By early April, most schools had shifted to online learning, and families were faced with the new challenge of having to teach their kids at home.

For this research project, I recently asked a number of parents what it was like to home-school children during a global pandemic. Along with a few curses and tears, the majority offered the same response: “it’s hard. Really, really hard.”

It’s hard for students, separated from their peers and the comforts of routine. It’s hard for teachers, new to the joys of Zoom and having to adapt an enormous amount of material on the fly. It’s perhaps especially hard for parents and carers who suddenly find themselves thrust into the role of full-time educators.

How much harder, then, must this experience be for those whose first language is not English, now expected to help children with schoolwork delivered entirely through an unfamiliar medium? This has been the situation faced by many migrant families during the Covid-19 crisis (and the focus of a research project by the Language on the Move team for which findings are expected early in the New Year).

Home schooling information and linguistic barriers

For first-generation migrants and refugees, the challenges of home schooling are often compounded by language barriers. According to the 2016 census, the majority of Australian migrants speak a language other than English at home, and 17% of those who speak a language other than English are not proficient in English. This number is even higher for migrants entering Australia under refugee status, with nearly a third found to have low levels of spoken English.

For these families, communicating with schools about distance learning and Covid-19 can be highly problematic. When Australian schools closed in response to the virus, teachers and principals were having to relay changing government guidelines to parents on a daily basis. Official statements from the Department(s) of Education at this time contained complex, technical explanations of Covid safety protocols and changes to schooling procedures. Tasked with passing on this barrage of information, many schools sent out e-mails which were equally long, dense and often indecipherable (see also Tazin Abdullah’s research for the same problem with information overload faced by ELICOS students).

Understanding this type of communication requires a level of English literacy which is unrealistically high for many parents, and particularly so for those from non-English language backgrounds. As a result, many migrant parents have been unable to access ongoing communication from schools and government in regard to safety measures around Covid-19. This is a worrying finding during a crisis where, as Ingrid Piller has pointed out, every individual needs to have access to timely health information to ensure the safety of the community as a whole. A prediction borne out by the recent finding of the Victorian government that people born outside Australia were over-represented among Covid-19 infections by 20%.

Teaching in an unfamiliar language

Home schooling lessons present yet another linguistic hurdle for migrant families. Officially, parents in Australia were not expected to “teach” their children during lockdown home schooling, but rather to “guide, aid and facilitate” their learning. In reality, however, many of the materials being sent home by schools look very much like lesson plans, and require much more than casual supervision to implement.

Home schooling lessons have proven to be confusing and at times overwhelming for many migrant parents. Even with high levels of English proficiency, helping children with subjects such as maths can be a challenge due to the highly specific vocabulary required. For the 17% of Australian migrants who aren’t proficient in English, explaining complex concepts in an unfamiliar language poses an even greater challenge. Parents report feeling helpless at the prospect of having to decipher material at a primary or high school level, while they themselves are in the process of learning English.

(Image credit: Kelly Sikkema via Unsplash)

A lack of access to previously available translation services has compounded this problem. Despite considerable efforts by many schools to provide interpreters and translated materials, lockdown restrictions have made it difficult to give families the support they need. Refugee agencies also report that they are stretched to capacity due to current demand for interpreters. Many parents from refugee backgrounds have limited literacy skills in their own languages, and access to support services is particularly important to meet the demands of home learning.

Additional home schooling challenges for migrant families

A rapid research study by the University of Tasmania found that Australian children from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds are at risk of long-term disadvantage from home schooling. The report shows significant disparity in levels of access to basic schooling equipment and services, with many vulnerable families lacking the physical space and resources to support home learning.

Of particular concern is the finding that many vulnerable Australian families still lack basic access to computers and reliable internet service. This includes a large proportion of recently arrived migrant and refugee families, whose access to technology is below the national average. A number of recent media reports highlight this issue, interviewing Australian migrants with no home computers, needing to share mobile phones in order to access online schoolwork.

This has serious implications for migrant families in the current pandemic. Students and parents rely on internet access to engage with schools and services. There has been some government recognition of this ongoing problem, with a ministerial briefing paper acknowledging that: “for many Australian families online home learning is not a practical option without additional resourcing”. Additional equipment such as computers and modems have reportedly been made available by the NSW Department of education, and in April the Victorian government announced a program to subsidise NBN connections for students in need.

Better disaster preparation needed

Digital inequality is an ongoing problem in Australia, and the current pandemic has merely highlighted the fact that many vulnerable groups are being left out of this mode of communication.

For migrant and refugee families, increased access to computers only solves half the problem. Digital literacy training is also necessary for parents to be able to navigate online learning programs, with the majority of home schooling material only accessible through platforms such as Google classroom. Targeted services such as interpreters and teaching assistants need to be made available to parents on a consistent basis, with strategies in place for future lockdowns and periods of home schooling.

Individual schools and community groups have gone to enormous lengths to assist migrant families throughout the pandemic, placing considerable strain on already limited resources and personnel. Responsibility for providing these services needs to be at a government level, however, and specifically targeted at vulnerable communities.

As a matter of national disaster preparedness – given the ongoing nature of the pandemic but also considering other future crises – there is an urgent need to ensure that families of all backgrounds are able to communicate with schools, and to prepare for future home schooling events.

Now is the time to take stock of the lessons learnt from the pandemic and incorporate the needs of migrant families into everyday schooling practices.

We prepared and distributed numerous learning packs

Editor’s note: The language challenges of the COVID-19 crisis have held much of our attention this year. Here on Language on the Move, we have been running a series devoted to language aspects of the COVID-19 crisis since February, and readers will also have seen the special issue of Multilingua devoted to “Linguistic Diversity in a Time of Crisis”.

Additionally, multilingual crisis communication has been the focus of the research projects conducted by Master of Applied Linguistics students at Macquarie University as part of their “Literacies” unit. We close the year by sharing some of their findings.

Here, Nusrat Parveen reflects on the challenges of home learning from her experience as a teacher in a highly linguistically diverse primary school in a Sydney suburb with relatively low socio-economic status.

***

We set up remote learning stations

When COVID-19 was declared a public health emergency in Australia in March 2020, schools shifted to implementing home-based learning. For a period of 10 weeks, students in NSW were “home-schooled.” This post explores the language and communication challenges remote teaching posed in my school, where 98% of students come from a language background other than English and where over half of students come from homes that find themselves in the lowest socio-economic status bracket, according to government data.

Scrambling to shift to remote learning

Shifting to remote learning constituted a huge challenge for schools.

On March 23, 2020, the NSW Department of Education declared remote learning for all students, except for the children of essential workers who could continue to attend school physically. The Department outlined the action plan for learning from home: schooling was to go digital with a combination of online and offline tasks.

Teachers went into overdrive to create learning from home activities, collate resources, and deliver home learning resource packs to students.

The challenges of communicating with all stakeholders

But creating activities and resource packs turned out to be the least of it. Communicating what was going on to all stakeholders turned out to be an even greater challenge.

We created remote learning grids

Department guidelines needed to be communicated to staff, parents, and students. This was not a one-off task as there were frequent changes, and everyone needed to be kept in the loop. Some of these communications needed to occur not only in English but also needed to be translated or interpreted for parents from non-English-speaking backgrounds.

School strategies to support remote learning

The following are some of the strategies that our school adopted to support remote learning:

• Loaning devices and providing internet access to households
• Providing IT support for students and parents
• Translating documents and interpreting communications as needed. This was done through community language teachers and community liaison officers.
• Setting up ‘Learning Stations’ in the school hall to deliver home learning resources and supporting parents to understand the resources and what was required of them in person but while adhering to social distancing safety protocols.
• Making regular phone calls to students and parents to follow up on learning and well-being
• Up-skilling teachers in the use of various online resources and platforms
• Using automated translation software to translate tasks for newly-arrived students with limited English
• Offering alternative offline resources for students with no internet options

We created special materials for new arrival students

As these examples show, remote learning created a large variety of communication challenges that needed to be met in a short time frame and with little preparation.

Maintaining regular communication with new arrival families

Generally, newly-arrived students receive extensive support with their English language learning and to ensure their well-being (see also Tazin Abdullah’s exploration of the language learning and support needs of ELICOS students during the pandemic).

Maintaining that level of support over the internet and through phone calls while also attending to all the communications mentioned above was almost impossible.

We created bilingual notices for parents

In this situation, where everyone was stretched to their limits, the tiered intervention support for new-arrival students took a backseat and more or less fell apart during the period of remote learning.

Eventually, the communication and support gap with new-arrival students that had emerged during the lockdown period had to be restored when NSW schools resumed face-to-face learning in May.

Lessons from the remote learning period

Parent feedback showed a lot of appreciation for the school’s efforts. However, it also showed that many tasks were considered too difficult for students and parents to understand. As 98% of our students come from a language-other-than-English background this may not be surprising.

Beyond the linguistic difficulties, the digital divide was very real in our community, which is at the lower end of socio-economic status in Sydney. Not having access to the required devices or to an internet connection was a problem for many families.

Now that the NSW school closure is in the past, heeding the lessons from this effort is vital for future disaster preparedness:

• We need a multilingual communication strategy that does not leave out anyone irrespective of whether they speak English (well) or not.
• We need to urgently bridge the digital divide so that everyone can access online communication if need be.

In short, policies and strategies need to pay attention to vulnerable students and families, including those who have limited English and/or are affected by poverty. This is not only vital during times of crisis but should be standard practice to ensure social cohesion and equitable access for all.

One of countless internet memes about crazy English spelling (Source: angmohdan.com)

During a dreary German winter in the 1980s, I would get up early each Friday morning, wrap myself up against the cold, and ride my bike in the morning darkness up “Gallows Hill Street”, where for many centuries the city’s court of justice had been located. My destination was a windowless underground classroom in a 1960s concrete building, where an “Advanced Dictation” class was taking place that was compulsory for all undergraduate students of English.

For 90 minutes each week, we would take dictation of some text, then swap the result of our labors with our neighbor, whose job it was to mark up the errors and tally them while the teacher wrote out the difficult words on the blackboard. Each week, this was an exercise in guessing and humiliation: for instance, how do you spell /ɪndaɪt/ when you hear it for the first time and have only the vaguest idea what it means? Most likely “indite”? Or is it spelled like “night” and “right” and hence “indight”? Or how about /teknɪklɪ/? To spell “technicly” seems obvious enough but wrong, wrong, and wrong again.

There are hundreds if not thousands such words in the English language that you need to know before you can spell them. Understanding the logic of the alphabet and the main sound-letter correspondences still leaves you with a long way to go when it comes to being able to read and write in English.

Most students in the class struggled and we all dreaded the final exam (I passed with a credit, which, by my standards, was disappointingly low).

A student in the class had dug up a quip by the Austrian linguist Mario Wandruszka, who had opined that “English spelling is an insult to the human intelligence.” Being teenagers, we all agreed with the statement and – in a classic case of sour grapes – consoled ourselves with the idea that not doing well in English dictation was in fact a badge of honor that demonstrated our superior intelligence.

Pope Gregory sending St Augustine to convert the people of England to Christianity in 597 (11th c manuscript, British Library)

In the years since, maybe in a case of Stockholm syndrome, I’ve come to adore English orthography. Today, I see it as an intricate system that contains within it the sediments of the innumerous contacts between different languages and cultures that make English such a fascinating language.

Adopting the Latin script

English writing had a design flaw from Day One: adopting the Latin alphabet, which is designed for the sound system of another language, Latin, to English was always going to be a problem – as has been proven innumerable times since the Latin alphabet has been adopted to more languages than any other script (as I explain in this lecture).

When the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain (ca. 400-700 CE), they brought with them not only their Germanic dialects but also their runic alphabet, which had been designed for the phonology of Germanic languages.

During Christianization the runic alphabet became associated with heathendom, and the Latin alphabet with Christianity. From 597 – the date of Augustine’s mission to Kent – Latin became the language of the new faith and, gradually, the alphabet of the Latin language began to be used to also write English.

Old English was a very different language from what it is today, and with the addition of a few letters, the match between sounds and letters was not too bad in those days, even if the problem of fewer letters than sounds has been a problem of English spelling since the beginning. The classical Latin alphabet had 23 letters, and three were added. These 26 letters now have to cover the 43 phonemes (19 vowels and 24 consonants) of modern English.

The last English king, King Harold, is killed during the Battle of Hastings in 1066 (Bayeux Tapestry)

So, the first story of language and culture contact encoded in English spelling is that of the contact between spoken Germanic dialects and the sophisticated literate world of Latin. It is also the story of adopting a new faith and the fundamental transformation of a culture this results in.

Mixing in French

Old English died in 1066. Although the name “English” suggests continuity, Old English is as different from English as we know it as, say, German or Norwegian.

This is because the Norman Conquest of 1066 brought Old English into intense contact with French. For centuries, a social divide separated English (the spoken peasant dialects) and French (the language of the upper classes, and the language of almost all writing in England during the period).

This medieval social-cum-linguistic divide is still vividly illustrated by Anglo-Saxon-origin terms for animals (e.g., pig, cow, sheep, deer) existing side-by-side with French-origin terms for the meat of those animals (e.g., pork, beef, mutton, venison). That the medieval division of labor was also an ethnolinguistic divide could not be clearer.

By the time “English” started to be used again in writing it was a fundamentally changed mixed language, and spelling conventions that made sense in a Germanic language co-existed, not always easily, with spelling conventions that made sense in French.

The printing press fossilizes spelling

As if all that language mixing was not enough to confuse English writing, the printing press, which was introduced to Britain by William Caxton in 1476, altered the relationship between speech and writing forever.

Caxton’s rant about linguistic diversity (from the Preface to his print of Eneydos)

The idea of orthography – that there is only one correct way to spell – was alien to the medieval mind. Spelling mirrored pronunciation closely and different scribes in different dialect areas spelled differently. Spelling was ultimately a matter of individual preference.

Printing changed that – not only because a standard was more convenient for printers but also because a uniform linguistic product could reach a larger market. Not surprisingly Caxton was one of the first to rail against linguistic diversity when he famously complained that “eggs” were called “egges” in some parts of England but “eyren” in others.

Standardization was born.

Initially, the idea of a standard language only applied to writing, and spoken English continued to be highly diverse.

What happens when spoken language continues to change but writing does not? They drift apart … and you end up with a spelling system that is more in tune with the pronunciation of 500 years ago than contemporary pronunciation. This is particularly true of English vowels whose pronunciation changed considerably between the 15^th and 18^th centuries in a process called the “Great Vowel Shift.”

The Great Vowel Shift and the stubborn conservatism of printing have created a rift between spoken and written English (Image credit: Wikipedia)

As a result, written and spoken English are today quite different beasts.

Is learning how to spell in English worth it?

Untold numbers of English language learners have, like myself, sweated to learn how to spell in English.

This task has been unnecessarily complicated by the false belief that we were learning an alphabetic script. Systematic letter-sound relationships are the foundation of English spelling but they are complemented by a significant logographic element, where letter combinations are systematically related to morphemes. The triple baggage of adopting an ill-suited alphabet, of mixing two languages and their internal logics, and of separating written from spoken language, has inserted a considerable logographic element (I explain this is in greater detail with the example of <s> as plural marker and <ce> as marker of word-final voiceless /s/ in non-inflected words in this lecture).

Logograms can only be acquired through patient practice, as any Chinese teacher will tell you. However, a knowledge of language history can help make sense of the logographic element. And it is certainly more motivating to understand English spelling in its socio-historical context instead of considering it “an insult to human intelligence.” The reward of learning how to spell is the kind of reading automaticity and speed that characterizes the proficient reader and that is the ultimate point of literacy.

What is your experience with learning or teaching English spelling? And how do you think digital technologies will change English spelling?

To explore further, view the lecture about the spread of the Latin alphabet that goes with this blog post:

My “audience” as I was recording the first online lecture for the new term

Yesterday, I spent six hours pre-recording a puny little lecture of 15 minutes for the postgraduate “Literacies” unit I’m teaching this term. The unit has gone fully online this year due to the Covid-19 pandemic and I have been planning for interactive delivery in a variety of formats.

One element in the overall mix is a podcast series. I’ve taught the unit a couple of times already so have the content down pat and figured all I needed to do was sit down and deliver my lecture into a microphone. It did not turn out to be a smooth experience.

The content I was covering yesterday – features of written vs spoken language – usually takes about 40 minutes of class time to deliver. That includes asking questions, taking student responses, and summarizing those responses. A standard teacher question-student response-teacher feedback cycle.

Without dialogue, the lecture shrunk to not much more than a third of the time it would normally take but producing it blew out by about nine times.

Most of this production time is a one-off, as I needed to learn how to use Adobe Audition and spent a lot of time designing an intro and an outro, and figuring out how to overlay them with a signature tune (I chose a few bars of Vivaldi’s Spring Concerto :-). Including a signature tune is a playful option that is obviously not strictly necessary but was fun to learn.

Quite a bit of time also went to editing in order to smooth out bloopers.

Hot tip: If you are unhappy with anything you’ve recorded, don’t stop recording. Instead, pause, click your tongue three times, and repeat whatever went wrong. This way you can easily identify the bits you’ll need to cut in your voice editor.

I may have smoothed out major bloopers but the final product still doesn’t please me and doesn’t meet my usual standards of work. I’m dissatisfied with recurring disfluencies, with too much detail in some parts and not enough in others, a joke that I started and then trailed off because it seemed silly delivering it to the unmoved microphone.

Seeing how much time I invested, I’m wondering where did I go wrong?

Maybe it’s not me at all but the problem is the genre of the academic lecture?

What’s wrong with lectures?

Lectures are odd creatures at the intersection of reading and writing, as a quick look at the table listing the key differences between written and spoken language will show.

The academic lecture, including in its pre-recorded version, is obviously a form of spoken language. However, most of its characteristics are typically associated not with spoken but with written language:

• The lecture is technologically mediated (recording device at my end, audio player at yours).
• Speaker and audience are distant across time and space (I recorded the lecture yesterday in my home and students will listen to it at other times and places).
• In terms of context, the lecture sits somewhere in the middle between high and low context (it’s part of a unit taught in the Applied Linguistics program at Macquarie University but it could be taught in any Applied Linguistics program in an English-medium program).
• The recording is durable and not as fleeting as the spoken word usually is.
• The lecture is not quite as scannable as a written text but you can certainly stop and rewind if there is something you didn’t understand, or jump ahead if you get bored.
• The lecture is planned and tightly structured.
• In terms of syntactic complexity and formality, I was aiming for a simple and casual style – the desired “conversational tone” of a podcast. However, on listening back, I discovered that I used a garden path sentence to exemplify one, and I also used words such as “therefore” and “thus” – clear traces of written language.
• I don’t even need to mention that the content of the lecture is relatively abstract (“Features of written language”) and that I delivered a monologue.

These mismatched criteria produce a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” genre. For instance, I did not write up the lecture beforehand and so did not read out a script. In face-to-face teaching, I don’t need one and for pre-recordings the general advice seems to be that a script will make the lecture sound unnatural. Even so, I’m now I’m beating myself up for uneven delivery – there are a few unfinished thoughts and dysfluencies.

How did such an awkward genre become the main mode of university teaching?

Miniature drawing of a medieval lecture (Image credit: British Library)

The academic lecture has its origins in the European Middle Ages, when both literacy – the ability to read and write – and books were scarce. In a world where writing is cheap and literacy is almost universal, it is hard to imagine just how scarce they were back then. Only the most valuable information was committed to writing. Hand-written manuscripts took years to produce and books were a rare and extremely valuable commodity. Online courses, textbooks, even notebooks were still far in the future.

To teach the valuable information committed to manuscripts, early university education therefore consisted of a “lecturer” reading to an audience. A lecturer is literally a “reader”, a title still used in UK academia today for what is an Associate Professor in the Australian and US systems. The lecturer read the set text out loud, sometimes providing running commentary or explanations as they went along.

That explains why the lecture is such an odd cross-over genre between written and spoken language. It’s a written text read out loud.

What it doesn’t explain is why we are reverting to this mode of teaching as we transition from face-to-face to online teaching. The best explanation I can come up with is that technical affordances of the digital world have changed both written and spoken language in fundamental ways, and we are all still working out how to harness them best for learning.

What do you think about pre-recorded lectures? And what are your most and least favorite teaching genres? Have they changed between face-to-face and online?

As for me, I’ll try and mix genres as much as possible. Even if they make me cringe, I’ll keep podcasts in the mix for now, mainly because I want my students to experience another form of writing to learn: note taking. To commit something to memory and process it deeply, writing continues to be the medium of choice.

“To reach the mind, knowledge has to flow through the hand,” as one of my lecturers in teacher training kept insisting.

Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Language Resources and Research Center for Standardized Use of Chinese Language, Beijing Language and Culture University

***

Editor’s note: This is a translated and shortened version of an article first published in Chinese as “战疫语言服务团的故事” in the CPPCC Newspaper on March 9, 2020. Translated by Dr Zhang Jie, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan, and Dr Li Jia, Yunnan University, Kunming.

In this article, Professor Li Yuming not only recounts the rapid linguistic response of Chinese applied sociolinguists to the COVID-19 epidemic but also outlines a program for “emergency linguistics,” a research specialisation devoted to language and communication aspects of disaster preparedness.

***

Handbook of Hubei Dialects for Medical Assistance Teams

Doctor-patient communication in Hubei dialect, online resource

The outbreak of COVID-19 has required the whole of China to stand together against the epidemic with the mobilisation of national resources to assist Hubei, the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak. One of the difficulties in mobilising trans-provincial resources is the language barrier between doctors and patients in clinical communication. To solve the urgent needs of language communication between doctors from other parts of China and local patients, the medical assistance team of Qilu Hospital of Shandong University compiled The Guidebook of Wuhan Dialect for Medical Assistance Teams, Audio Materials of Wuhan Dialect for Medical Assistance Teams, and The Handbook of Doctor-Patient Communication within 48 hours after the team arrived in Wuhan. This is an instance of the provision of language services as part of the emergency response.

The example demonstrates the necessity for linguists to participate in fighting COVID-19. As linguists, we should not let medical personnel be distracted by also having to deal with language and communication barriers.

On February 10, 2020, Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Language Resources of BLCU and the National Institute of Chinese Language Matters and Social Development of Wuhan University, together with more than a dozen research institutes and enterprises, initiated a program to join the fight against COVID-19 by offering language services.

Under the guidance of the Department of Language Information Management of the Chinese Ministry of Education, the Handbook of Hubei Dialects for Medical Assistance Teams was compiled to facilitate communication between medical assistance teams and patients in Hubei province. The Handbook includes 76 sentences and 156 words which are commonly used in diagnosis and treatment along with their equivalents in the dialects of Wuhan, Xiangyang, Yichang, Huangshi, Jingzhou, E’zhou, Xiaogan, Huanggang, and Xianning.

Although team members lived in different localities, they performed the tasks with tacit cooperation and managed to play to their respective strengths. With their devotion for three days and three nights, seven types of language service products were made available on WeChat, a dedicated webpage, converging media, video clips, Tik Tok, a 24/7 telephone hotline, and instant translation software.

The Handbook of Hubei Dialects for Medical Assistance Teams was of significant help to front-line medical personnel. Not only was it suitable for different groups of people in various scenarios, but also bolstered the confidence of medical workers. It was very well received. Almost 30 WeChat official accounts related to linguistics re-posted the handbook, setting a precedent for WeChat official accounts in fighting against the epidemic. So far, the total clicks of the handbook on WeChat have amounted to nearly 30,000; for the recording, around 340,000; and for the online version, more than 100,000. Furthermore, nearly 6,000 copies of pocketbooks published by the Commercial Press were distributed free of charge directly to the medical assistance teams in Hubei.

Bilingual Greek-Chinese diagnostic sheet

Apart from compiling the handbook of Hubei dialects, language services later expanded to foreign languages targeting international students and foreign residents who began to return and come to China with the effective prevention and control of the epidemic and the resumption of work and production. To better inform these foreigners of the updated information about the coronavirus and to protect their safety, Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Language Resources of BLCU, as a core member of the program, developed A Guide to the Prevention and Control of COVID-19 Epidemic in Foreign Languages promptly and efficiently on February 27.

The Guide includes 75 sentences commonly used in daily precautions, entry precautions, medical treatment, and personal protection. So far, the Guide has been written in more than 20 languages including Japanese, Korean, Persian, Italian, Arabic, English, German, Russian, and French, with versions including video clips, multimedia cards, and software system.

Since the launch of the Guide, not only has it received attention and support from the Ministry of Education, the State Language Commission, the National Center for Disease Control, the Foreign Affairs Office of the People’s Government of Beijing Municipality, the Chinese embassies and consulates abroad, but has also been welcomed by overseas Chinese students.

As the novel coronavirus has been spreading in other parts of the world, the Guide has now also been shared by foreign communities over the Internet and won positive feedback from some Chinese diplomatic missions.

Through such practices, China’s anti-epidemic progress and experience can be disseminated abroad, serving as humanitarian assistance for the international community in the prevention and control of the virus.

The Guide will continue to be updated based on the latest development of the epidemic at home and abroad, with more languages being added.

Another project we are working on is named Plain Chinese. Plain Chinese was successfully developed and is currently being tested. The project is tailored to international students and foreigners in China in the hope that they could be better informed about COVID-19, even if their Chinese language proficiency is limited. It is also helpful to those Chinese people who lack proficiency in Putonghua.

During and after any public emergency, mental health and psychological well-being is vital. Therapeutic interventions constitute another area for the provision of language services, and therefore constitute another duty for linguists to take on. Psychologists and linguists are expected to work hand in hand to deliver strategies for “linguistic comforting” during and after the COVID-19 disaster.

It is too early to draw conclusions as the disaster is yet to end, but I do wish to offer my reflections based on our provision of language services over the past 20 days.

First, being a scholar should not confine us to writing papers and imparting knowledge, but must include having a sense of social responsibility, the awareness and capability to solve practical problems. In recent decades, a group of Chinese sociolinguists have been calling people’s attention to language in social life (yuyan shenghuo).

This group has been advocating for attention to language-related problems in social development. Collectively, these linguists are known as the school of language in social life (语言生活派 yuyan shenghuo pai).

Professor Li Yuming’s original article “战疫语言服务团的故事” in CPPCC Newspaper, March 09, 2020

The reason why the language services program was able to rally so many volunteers, at a single call, is that these scholars actually were spurred to action by their convictions, i.e. to put their academic strength into the practice of the great cause of the motherland. Apart from the mission for research and education, scientific and educational studies also carry a social responsibility. In the fight against the epidemic, we should not simply care about self-protection, but instead, contribute ideas and exert efforts for the containment of the virus.

Second, information technology needs to be given full play in the prevention and control of epidemics. The current epidemic is characterized by immobility of people and commodities, but free flow of information.

Without information technology, it would have been far more difficult to fight this disaster. As a matter of fact, members of the language services program have not yet met each other in person, but have done an outstanding job with the help of online group chat.

Moreover, the development and promotion of language service products effectively utilized the previously established corpus, the modern language technology developed, and the inter-disciplinary talents cultivated during the construction of language resources. The progress made highlights the significance of China’s achievements in terms of the Internet and modern information technology.

Third, a plan on language services in emergency response needs to be included in the prevention and control of public emergencies. It is a critical test for the national governance system and management competence to effectively handle public emergencies. In recent years, the prevention and control of public emergencies in China have made remarkable progress, with many statutes and contingency plans enacted, such as the Emergency Response Law of the People’s Republic of China, the National Plan on Emergency Response, and the Regulation on Response for Public Health Emergencies. Meanwhile, particular units specializing in public emergency management and services have also been established. However, linguistic contingency plans are still absent from those solutions. Through the current public health emergency, importance should be attached to filling this gap as soon as possible.

It is proposed that the plan on language services in emergency responses shall include at least three aspects, namely:

First, we shall formulate the National Mechanism and Plan on Language Services in Public Emergency Response, or simply revise the current statutes, regulations and plans, such as the Emergency Response Law of the People’s Republic of China, the National Plan on Emergency Response, by adding relevant content.

The details of language services in public emergency response, however, remain to be investigated. The following might be worthy of consideration: the selection of channels through which the information is released, e.g. telephone, radio, television, network media (Weibo and WeChat included); the languages that are supposed to be used in information dissemination, including Putonghua, plain Chinese, Chinese dialects (varieties), ethnic languages, signed languages, and foreign languages; possible communication barriers and concrete solutions; application of various modern language technologies; mechanisms and plans on language services in emergency response at different levels; and, other language-related content in various aspects of emergency response, such as prevention and preparedness, monitoring and early warning, emergency response and rescue, post-emergency recovery and reconstruction.

Second, a standing language service institution for public emergencies will need to be set up. During ordinary times, only a few in-service staff or researchers will be needed while others hold their original posts. When an emergency arises, they can be urgently summoned to offer various language services.

Third, greater importance will need to be attached to language-related studies in public emergency response. Language services in emergency response is actually a problem of language application within a particular sphere and for a specific purpose. It is a special type of language situation. We should draw on the practical experience of such language services at home and abroad and take advantage of the academic achievements made in applied linguistics, to actively conduct research in this domain and establish the discipline of “emergency linguistics.” In doing so, linguists are able to contribute more to public emergency response. What is more, research centers devoted to language access in emergency response shall be founded, which are aimed at dealing with different types of public emergencies such as natural disasters, accidents, public health incidents, social security incidents, and to cultivate specialized talents by integrating with the existing departments of public emergency management and services.

(Image credit: Psychology Today)

Device use is a major contemporary education challenge for parents and teachers alike. In our family, we have fairly strict rules around the use of internet-connected screens. However, these rules have become increasingly difficult to implement, as our child has grown older. This is because the boundaries between device use for leisure and for study have disappeared.

A few years back, our teenager’s school instituted a bring-your-own-device policy and notebook computers and tablets quickly became a major part of learning. A lot of homework and out-of-school studying shifted onto devices, too.

All of a sudden, limiting screen time to less than two hours per day, as recommended by pediatricians, no longer made sense. It became obvious that approved screen time had to be extended. But that was not all. The big question – and the source of what seems like a running battle that has been going on for years now – became whether, at any given point, the device was used for studying or for other purposes.

Monitoring what your child and your students do on their devices – as opposed to whether they are using them or not – is much harder and less clear-cut.

Multitasking

The challenge goes back to the amazing capacity of today’s technology for multitasking. While I am writing up this blog post in my computer’s word processor, I also have Adobe Reader running in the background (with an annotated article by May and Elder open), my Endnote bibliographic database, a file explorer, and an Internet browser (with four separate windows open). All these tools help me to write this text.

I know that this is a comparatively Spartan use of my computer’s capacity. I have no personal social media accounts, I have no push notifications enabled, and, over the three decades of my professional career, I have developed the habit of monitoring my time closely.

Young people are socialized into a very different use of digital technologies and can easily confuse the computer’s capacity for multitasking with their own ability to multitask.

A recent study (reported in May and Elder, 2018) found that as many as 90% of college students multitask when they use digital devices. They also report that their multitasking aides their learning.

As a mother and a teacher, my gut feeling has always been that these young people are kidding themselves, and that it requires strict discipline to reap the benefits of new technologies.

Turns out that I have been right, as the review of research into device use and learning by May and Elder (2018) shows. Reviewing 38 research articles related to multitasking and academic performance, these authors find that “multitasking interferes with attention and working memory, negatively affecting GPA, test performance, recall, reading comprehension, note-taking, self-regulation, and efficiency” (p. 1).

These negative effects hold both in-class and out-of-class. They hold whether the multitasking is off-task (e.g., checking Facebook while listening to a lecture) or on-task (e.g., looking up a Wikipedia entry relevant to course content).

Source: May and Elder (2018, p. 12)

What is more, these negative effects hold not only for the multitasker themselves but also for nearby peers: seeing someone else going through their news feed while studying is almost as distracting as engaging in such multitasking yourself. One study found that students within view of a multitasking peer scored 17% lower on tests than those who had no multitasking peer in their field of vision. This means that – in classrooms where digital devices are permitted – it is almost impossible for students to escape the negative effects of multitasking.

I mentioned above that I have my internet browser open in the background. I do not go there while writing other than to fact-check and language-check. Turns out, I might be better off even without this sparse use of the Internet: one research reported by May and Elder (2018) found that students who write their assignments on computers that are not connected to the Internet achieve higher grades than those who write while connected …

Digital technologies doubtlessly have huge benefits and are here to stay. However, we need to mitigate their negative effects if we want to ensure that out devices make us more, not less, smart. To this end, off-task multitasking needs to be eliminated.

Elimination requires awareness of the dangers of multitasking and self-regulation. As May and Elder (2018) show, both awareness and self-regulation are currently widely lacking. This post is here to help raise awareness and I will be curious to hear what strategies for self-regulation you have in place. How do you ensure you are staying focused and on task while using your device to learn and study?

Reference

May, K. E., & Elder, A. D. (2018). Efficient, helpful, or distracting? A literature review of media multitasking in relation to academic performance. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1-13. [open access] ]]> https://languageonthemove.com/what-can-you-do-so-that-your-device-doesnt-make-you-stupid/feed/ 150 21907