A Meta-Analysis of the Correlation Between Heritage Language and Ethnic Identity by Mu (2015)

Mu, G. M. (2015). A meta-analysis of the correlation between heritage language and ethnic identity. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 36, 239-254. doi:10.1080/01434632.2014.909446

            In his expansive yet critical paper, Mu intervened to the gap in research justifying cross-ethnic claims between ethnic identity and heritage language (HL) proficiency (p. 240). He employed meta-analysis, an advanced statistics for contrasting and combining quantitative studies (p. 241), and treated 18 articles that had successfully met the selection criteria (p. 242). Component models of this analysis (pp. 246-247) revealed that there is a medium positive correlation in the differences of the included studies and significant correlation of ethnic identity and HL proficiency across different ethnic groups (p. 248).

            This instrumentation of analysis, however, has its own limitations. Methodological variations in sampling across the analyzed studies raised a concern (p. 248). Collectively, convenience sampling is administered but the participants of the study are the differential, i.e. strong proportions of children, adolescents, and young adults. Parental intervention and multi-ethnicities are notable considerations altogether (p. 249). Furthermore, the studies’ operationalization, i.e., adapted frameworks, measurement, i.e., self-reported results and instrumentation, and localization, i.e., spatial diversities, have been discussed as deeply felt consideration for future research (pp. 249-250). Mu also raised the development of the studies’ theoretical bases. He urged working on mainstreaming as a response to theoretical overlaps (p. 250). He personally proposed Bourdieu’s “sociological notion of habitus” to harmonize concurrent approaches in ethnic identity and HL research (p. 251).

            Mu can be commended with his attempt to ‘standardize’ the results of the studies. Yet, his attempt to arrive at a transcending standard authority affirming the correlation of ethnic identity and HL use is in itself must be reconsidered, e.g., for weighted sample sizes. Gladly, this was mentioned before resting the paper’s case (pp. 250-251).

Ethnolinguistic Orientation and Language Variation: Measuring and Archiving Ethnolinguisitc Vitality, Attitudes, and Identity by Noels, Kil, & Yang (2014)

Noels, K. A., Kil, H., & Yang, F. (2014). Ethnolinguistic orientation and language variation: Measuring and archiving ethnolinguisitc vitality, attitudes, and identity. Language and Linguistics Compass, 8, 618-628. doi:10.1111/lnc3.12105

            Ethnolinguistic vitality, attitudes and identity have indeed received a lot of attention from various authors over the past four decades (p. 620). In this particular report, Noels and her team indexed studies that were used from the earliest consideration of ethnicity and language to what it is today. Furthermore, they suggested to having the studies archived to have a corpus dedicated for the field.

            Upon examination, past and present studies expose several points of improvement.  The long standing ethnolinguistic vitality (ELV) framework was later deemed to lack the communicative competence and language use, thus subjective perception of ethnolinguistic vitality (SELV) emerged; and the Subjective Vitality Questionnaire (SVQ) as its instrument (p. 620). However, SVQ was found out to be unidimensional, i.e., not measuring discrete latent variables of language vitality perceptions (p. 621). More recent studies showed more complex developments, which include psychological (p. 622), attitudinal  (pp. 623-624), allegiance-acculturation (p. 624), and situational considerations (pp. 625) as variables.

            Strikingly, the team favored quantitative research (p. 619). Though it seemed that the trend in research in the Philippines, as for my experience, tends to curve towards qualitative research, this is a revelation that it is not always appropriate. This is because it can “concisely document variables of interest”. Also, the presentation of language stereotypes (pp. 622-623) strikes a new note to my ears. It is not that I haven’t observed it before. It is the thought of the possibility that simple inquiries can be structured and researched is encouraging.

“Will this hell never end?”: Substantiating and Resisting Race-Language Policies in a Multilingual High School by Malsbary (2014)

Malsbary, C. (2014). “Will this hell never end?”: Substantiating and resisting race-language policies in a multilingual high school. Anthropology Education Quarterly, 45, 373-390. doi:10.1111/aeq.12076

Building on Critical Race Theory (CRT; p. 374), Malsbary revealed white supremacy and white racial consciousness is destroying academic participation and success of racial and ethnic students (pp. 381-383) in an English Second Language (ESL) program from a top performing high school in California.

The main contentions of the study are (a) exposing discriminating policies in the educational system and (b) fostering civil rights action from youth’s policy-making practices. She argued that in the present context, educational success of young people in the school’s ESL program is defined by their proficiency of English (p. 376) to the extent that this system demands “singular identities at personal cost” (p. 377). Malsbury even indicates that “motivation” reasons of dropping-out or even failing in the program could not be the singular cause (p. 382) even though this is the go-to reason of many teachers under the study. Judgment of language use, mispronunciation, and overall hostility (p. 380) is borne in such system of white racial consciousness (p. 381). Teachers (pp. 378-379), generational racial students (pp. 381-382) in the classroom, and the curriculum (p. 383) can be held accountable for this, as well. The “other” students, i.e. the “emergent bilinguals” (p. 386), tried to resist assimilation but proved to have less success (pp. 383-384) and fewer initiated to adapt individual classroom bi-/multilingual policies, which studies have shown to yield higher academic performance (p. 385).

This study carefully uncovers the discrepancies in the educational system. Also, this research is conceptually challenging the educational status quo and not the governing race. (This should be accentuated since the title can be bias to hate). As for her methodology, her decision to have the high school ESL students as subjects is empirically sound and reasonable (see Mu, 2015). Nevertheless, she could have used Discourse Analysis to account for the near-genuine attitude of the participants towards the subject. I recognize, however, that this would expand the research in its entirety.

Ethnicity by Harris (2013)

Harris, R. (2013). Ethnicity. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics. London: Routledge.

            Amidst the confusion of how to conceptualize ethnicity in its very essence, Harris, in this chapter, adapted Stuart Hall’s interpretive frames (p. 345). Respective to these frames, which I would call ‘gradation’, he cited tensions (pp. 346-347), which brought the conceptualization of “ethnicity” (pp. 347-348), and birth of applied linguistics in the field (p. 348).

            He highlighted several stages of colonization and showed how the Anglo perspectives on language planning and policy posed threats to a colony’s ethnicity and ‘progress’ (pp. 349-350). With the growth of English varieties (see World Englishes on p. 351) and migration of non-native English speakers to Anglo centers of the world, taught English language is considered to have taken a form as “proxy for a general discourse of hostility” (pp. 352-355). This part of the chapter deeply tugs a string in me, of my ethnic background and extends to the people from the examples presented. Today, research on the field is constantly challenged by the changing landscape of ethnicity and language use (p. 355). These challenges are brought by social actors that in themselves transcending ethnic boundaries and class (p. 356).

            It should be noted that Harris gave limitations in the article’s discussion. In this light, language is portrayed as a key player of modernity, hostility, and unity across ethnicities. English being the language of ‘progress’ changed the make up of the colonies, e.g., Sub-Saharan Africa. Moreover, it showed that even though ethnic language vitality and instrumentality are threatened by imposing English language in education, there could still be ways to facilitate harmony among ethnicities and languages as seen on the examples from Singapore and the African American Vernacular English case.

At this juncture, applied linguistics moved from being heavily focused on education to involvement in language planning and policy. Applied linguistics in the area of ethnicity and language is preparing itself to accommodate such developments in the field.

Notes on Ethnicity by Harris (2013)

Harris, R. (2013). Ethnicity. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics. London: Routledge. 

I. Introduction

- There are set limitations to the chapter, bulleted in page 344.

A. Ethnicity and applied linguistics

1. Post-WWII: AL’s dev’t from sources of authority from locations of the ‘Anglo diaspora’; “learning of English by ethnic and racial ‘others’” is a central focus (p. 344).

2. Teaching English (other EU languages), raised questions about ‘ethnicity’ and ‘race’ (p. 345).

B. The concept of Ethnicity

1. AL “has not supplied a lead in offering its [ethnicity] own explicit conceptualization” (p. 345; see quote from Hutchinson and Smith).

C. An Intepretive frame for conceptualizing ethnicity

- Stuart Hall on key sociological and philosophical notions; three dimensions/ frames: ‘traditional (pre-modern)’, ‘modern’, ‘late modern/ity’ (p.345).

D. Harris presented definitional/ background on Tensions between tradition and modernity & Tensions between modernity and late modernity (pp. 346-7).

1. “[…] ‘race’ is a social and cultural construction rather than a biological-scientific fact.” Harris and Rampton’s comment on the latter statement is highlighted on page 347.

2. ‘Race’ on ethnicity relates to classification, i.e. “sharing common ancestry...language…religion, and a distinctive physical appearance; note ‘primitive’ (p. 347).

3. However, a shift from “identifying essences” and “locating” peoples to “analyzing practices and social processes of categorization”, as in race/ethnicity (see Harris & Rampton, p. 348).

II. Tradition, modernity and ethnicity in applied linguistics

- Ethnicity within AL, “complicated and often relatively opaque matter” (p. 348).

A. Ethnicity and the ‘birth’, development and consolidation of applied linguistics

1. Anglo world on “a common commitment to the teaching of English worldwide” (Howatt & Widowson, 2004; p. 348). Britain to teaching English as L2 in secondary schools; US to documenting Amerindian languages endangered for extinction.

2. Initial relationships operated with colonialist perspective in tradition and modernity. New configurations with regards to this are notable in the postcolonial period (p. 348).

B. Ethnicity and postcolonial language planning

1. 1950s and 1960s: characterized by “building modern nation states” through collaboration with former colonies (p. 349). “Local ethnically linked languages” marred with “backwardness”, non-instrumental.

2. Resolution processes portrayed in the cases of (1) Sub-Saharan Africa (rivalry>unity>Mazrui; colonial language) and (2) Singapore (dominance>neutrality>practicality; accommodation). See page 350.

C. A struggle over authority and authenticity

1. Who/Where is/are the center/s of authority and authenticity “with regard to English” and its teaching (p. 351)? Overviews on (1) dispute between Quirk and Kachru and (2) the native speaker intervention by Rampton.

2. Quirk and Kachru: perspectives “carried an underlying ethnic/racial embodiment” (p. 351). Finally, Anglo ethnicity remains as the “central reference point”, according to Rampton (1990).

3. Native speaker intervention: Rampton, issues of ethnicity “are negotiated rather than given” works in the light of late modern “frames of thought and analysis” (p. 351).

D. Ethnicity and applied linguistics ‘at home’: majority-minority relation

- Language learning as “proxy for a general discourse of hostility” (p. 352; pp. 353-5). UK: Assimilation principles. The USA: Cases on AAVE and Spanish language.

III. Modernity, late modernity and ethnicity in applied linguistics

- Ethnicity, grew from assuming groupings–“labels” (p. 355); as with Harris and Rampton, new configurations as ‘roUtes’ rather than ‘roOts’ (emphasis by the authors).

- Worthy to note is ‘social class’ in the context of ethnicity and language (p. 356).

Sociolinguistics of Ethnicity in Francophone Louisiana by Dajko (2012)

Dajko, N. (2012). Sociolinguistics of ethnicity in francophone Louisiana. Language and

Linguistics Compass, 6, 279-295. doi:10.1002/lnc3.333

            Language cannot be the only marker of ethnicity (p. 279) as perceived by the identified groups in this study by Dajko in Francophone Louisiana.

            She reiterated that there is a clear linguistic distinction in the variety of French, i.e. Colonial French, Louisiana Creole, and Cajun Creole, spoken in Louisiana (pp. 280-281). The developments of these varieties can be traced back to the history of immigrants from France (p. 281-283).  Moreover, these are caused by several factors including social class of immigrants from the Old World (p. 283), new generation of speakers (p. 284), and intermarriages (p. 285). Language leveling across these new communities excited the shift of identities resulting conflation of categories and, thus, confusion. Initially, white and people of color in the area freely identify themselves as speaker of Cajun or Creole, as one would feel most comfortable (p. 289), until the passing of misinformed legislations and polarization of ‘ethnicity’ to ‘race’ (p. 290).

Dajko conducted surveys of self-declared language labels (p. 290). This confirmed that speakers label their language in accordance with their ethnic affiliation rather than differences of speech patterns, i.e., identifying themselves as speakers of Cajun even though linguistically their speech is characterized as Creole. She also reaffirmed the existence of French used by American Indians (p. 291) from her dissertation work.

Speakers of a language are aware of their differences (p. 292). Dajko successfully argued that “informal observation” and “personal opinion” on matters involving ethnicities must be done away with (p. 291) as they result to confusion. When this is observed, it may contribute to well-informed legislation; legislation that in turn will strengthen ethnicities and respond to deeply felt identity of the peoples.

The Bible, Christianity, Ethnic Identity, and Nationhood by Hughes (2012)

Hughes, D. (2012). The Bible, Christianity, ethnic identity, and nationhood. Ethnic identity from the margins: A Christian perspective. Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library.

Hughes presented how ethnicity and ethnic identity, even for those who are marginalized ethnicities, are made ‘concrete’ alongside Christianity and the message of the Bible.

            This chapter provides an overview of the early works in the translation of the Bible, which dates back to the second century BC (pp. 59-60). A focus is then shifted to the formation of the English identity and the place of the Bible in it until it reached ‘nationhood’. Hughes goes on to say, “Christianity in general and the Bible in particular made a vital contribution to the shaping and stabilizing of English identity” (p. 63). In Wales, Hughes argues that ethnic identity can take its shape through ‘nonconformity’ and could weaken through assimilation (p. 74; see the cases on pp. 78-84). For this matter, contributions of Griffith Jones of Llanddowror, Thomas Charles and Mary Jones were given emphases. For a growing state like England expansion not just with trade but also with influence is expected. This gave rise to the period of English Christian mission, as well. Even though imperial authority and imperialistic purpose primarily propelled the missionary works, many missionaries began translating the Bible in the heart languages of Tsonga, Baganda, and Yoruba.

In effect, Hughes highlighted a warning that when theories of “progress” concern themselves with production, democratization, and with “better material circumstances”, “more nonmaterial cultural values could be sacrificed on the altar of this new god” (p.74). This statement deeply leaves an imprint to modern thought on ethnicity and language. It embodies the struggles and successes of the marginalized ethnicities in this chapter.

Does Ethnolinguistic Vitality Theory Account for the Actual Vitality of Ethnic groups? A Critical Evaluation by Yamgur (2011)

Yamgur, K. (2011). Does ethnolinguistic vitality theory account for the actual vitality of ethnic groups? A critical evaluation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32, 111-120. doi:10.1080/01434632.2010.541914

            Ethnolinguistic Vitality Theory (EVT) and its accompanying questionnaire was retested and critically accounted for in this paper by Yamgur. He took the Turkish community in diaspora with focus on four countries, namely Germany, Netherlands, France and Australia.

            Calling on the article by Elhala, Yamgur supported and cited several weaknesses of the instrument in question. He noticed that SEVQ, EVT’s instrumentation, failed to produce consistency of results in determining Demographic, Institutional Control, and Status factors (pp. 118-9), as in this study. He went on to discover that SEVQ couldn’t reconcile mainstream versus immigrant vitalities (p. 116). He cited it as an instrumentation that is contextually difficult when administered across geographies under the same ethnic communities (pp. 116, 117-118).  Also, building on Fishman, he emphasized that language should be intertwined with the ethnic core values to achieve language maintenance (p. 118), which the instrumentation had not incorporated. He then suggested reconstructing the concepts under EVT and producing a more inclusive instrumentation.

            Yamgur, however, did not discredit some important insights gained from the EVT, such as the revealed importance of generational considerations (p. 113), social network (p. 117) and media portrayal of Turkish in diaspora in language maintenance. It is accepted that instrumentations have vulnerable areas for improvement and Yamgur had successfully pinpointed these areas of consideration under the EVT.

Sociocultural Influences on Classroom Interactional Styles by Sullivan (1996)

  Sullivan, P. (1996). Sociocultural Influences on Classroom Interactional Styles. TESOL Journal, 6, 32-34.

     In an English as Second Language (ESL) classroom, various behavior can be observed among the students. Sociocultural factors, as the present shift of understanding takes us, provides an informed assessment to these interactional behaviors than a go-to judgment of a student’s conformity or non-conformity in a particular learning setting.

     Sullivan (1996) drew insights from her documented observations in Vietnamese university-level English language classrooms. She picked two instances that recorded their interaction in the class. These revealed presence of (a) high noise levels from individual and overlapping question-answering practice and (b) widespread repetition and ‘playful’ interjection of other students between the student being asked and the teacher who is asking. This behavior is contextually ‘supportive’ and not seen as debilitative to learning.

     This classroom interactional style for the Vietnamese immigrant student is somehow inhibited in a new setting. The importance of ‘verbal support’, and much of it, which is present in the Vietnamese ESL classroom, has been more felt in an interview. Furthermore, the student experiences disconnectedness in activities, such as divided grouping, and shock in a ‘silent’ U.S. classroom.

     Values and cultural practices are seen to have reinforced this feeling of connection and support from the learning community of the subjects being studied. Shared lives inside and outside the campus among the Vietnamese are contrasted with that of the U.S. college experience. This contrast showed that the former set-up fostered strong life relationships and obligations, which transcends beyond the classroom. According to Sullivan, these connections are rarely cultivated in the U.S. since the university is viewed to be a transitory setting.

     In Vietnam, the teacher-student relationship is comparable to a father and his son, where the father teaches his son and the son has the task to complete his learning in obeisance, as in a family. With regards to group dynamics, the U.S. and Vietnam have differences in the purpose of groupings. The former purposes it to bde an opportunity to express various opinions without the necessity to agree while the latter sees its purpose as a group with a “consensus, or at least all agreeing to agree” (p. 34).

     The silence of a Vietnamese student in a U.S. classroom is not a matter of indifference but of ‘acceptable verbal interaction’. If transferred in a new setting, the student’s interactional style might even be seen as interrupting than contributing. Moreover, one-to-one recitation is perceived as putting the student on the spotlight.

     The student’s classroom behavior, which he built from his native learning community, can be reflected through his interaction in a new setting. This interaction may be externally pronounced or muted. I affirm the idea that one’s silence in a new classroom is not an antagonistic expression but, as presented, an initial manifestation of shock brought by being in a new classroom with a different interaction expectation default. Ideally, the student should not singularly cope with this. In establishing an inclusive classroom, the teacher’s orchestration is highly demanded. It is also important to point out that this can only be possible through the teacher’s active and informed decisions.

     Moving beyond the case of the Vietnamese student, Sullivan does not raise into question the interactional style in the U.S. This juxtaposition only demonstrates that learning communities learn differently but this difference is specific to how they learn effectively. In addition, the gradients of familial ties among teachers and students across cultures are not less ideal than others. However, the strength or weakness of this connection will surface as a student interacts in a new learning community.

     Finally, sociocultural factors, as stated above, influence the classroom’s interactional styles. In the field of education, differences in the students’ classroom participation can be attributed to their former learning community’s social and cultural conventions. Taking this lens to view such challenges will help the ESL teacher appropriate methods to advantageously position a diverse classroom towards a fruitful interaction and learning.

Fishman & Garcia's (2010) Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity: Disciplinary and Regional Perspectives

Fishman, J., & Garcia, O. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of language and ethnic identity: Disciplinary and regional perspectives (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The editors present an expansive introduction to the study of language and ethnic identity. Joshua Fishman starts by distinguishing language-and-ethnic-identity as a triad that he well acknowledges. Ethnicity, in Fishman’s introduction of the book, is referred to as something “attitudinal and attitudinally complex”. Nevertheless, these are discussed in studies of practices across cultures.

            Current trends on research methodologies cover the first part of the book, including topical approaches in the field. Several studies include the contributions of established arts and sciences to language policy from the areas of psychology, politics, economics, and education. François Grin, a contributor of the section in economics, posits that there will always remain a debatable aspect of any language policy that adapts the sciences and arts of economics (p. 86), among other fields aforementioned (pp. 45, 66). The second part covers studies from locations around the world. Language and ethnic distribution, fragmentation, vitality, and integrity are some key concepts herein (see pp. 286, 535, 470). Across the studies in this book, it shows that certain approaches to language and ethnic identity are challenged by ‘globalization’ and ‘transnationalism’; it can change. Research, therefore, becomes more complex, but still deemed methodologically possible (p. 520).

 Similar to other sources, there has been a stark description of attributing “ethnicity” as an assignment by the contextually dominant group to the gradients below it; i.e. separate “peopleness”. Overall, this book can be considered as a research manual in the field of language and ethnic identity. It discusses approaches to current research in the field where ethnolinguistics remains employable and a new demolinguistic perspective is introduced. Finally, local and global influences to ethnicity and education are widely considered as strong factors to ‘make’ or ‘break’ ethnicity.

Fieldwork in Field Methods in Linguistics by Newman (2009)

Newman, P. (2009). Fieldwork in field methods in linguistics. Language Documentation and Conservation, 3, 113-125.

Newman offered a quick but insightful (a) review of literature that discuss the human factor in fieldwork and (b) study on the implementation of field methods (FM) courses in universities in the U.S. and Canada.

He particularly highlighted four human factors/issues that he believes as beneficial in carrying out a linguistic project. Health issues in the field, according to him, are mostly exaggerated. Fatality from a disease that may be acquired in the field is actually curable. The difference is the presence of medical personnel, which may be working in the community or with the team (p. 115). He pointed out that researchers in the field should actually be more concerned with the following health hazard: car accidents, loss/broken eyeglasses, and lack of preparation in familiar medications such as allergy remedies or even sunscreen. Having children is the second issue he pointed out for reasons that include time demands, education, and overall psychological need. Next, he discussed gender and sex. He assessed that sex in the field is less discussed than gender, i.e. the role of women professionals (p. 117).  He raised interesting questions that will allow self-examination for a single, married, and homosexual person doing a fieldwork in response to the realities encountered in the field. Finally, he presented professional and personal ethics as an issue subsumed in the overarching human factor. Situations such as presence of long-time expatriates as resource, knowledge management protocols, and other professional responsibilities are taken to account.

For reference purposes, Newman built on the book by Howell (1990) for his discussion on health, Cassel (1987), Warren (1988), and Cassel & Jacobs (1987) for children, gender and sex, and professional and person ethics, respectively.

What interested me in this article is the ‘informal survey’  (p. 121) he conducted. This survey captured a rough picture of the status of FM in linguistics across all major PhD-granting linguistics departments in the U.S. I would definitely invite you to read this part of the article. I can point out two challenges that personally confronted me from the implications of the survey. First, as a student of [applied] linguistics, it is important to get our senses familiar with how our craft operates in the field, thus taking field methods class, at least. Secondly, and finally, theoretical knowledge in analyzing language must be empowered with descriptive methods of data gathering.

References:

Cassell, J. (1987). Children in the field: Anthropological experiences. Philadelphia: Temple University Press

Cassell, J. & Jacobs, S.E. (1987). Handbook on ethical issues in anthropology. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association.

Howell, N. (1990). Surviving fieldwork: A report of advisory panel on health and safety in fieldwork. American Anthropological Association, 26

Warren, C. A. B. (1988). Gender issues in field research. Qualitative Research Methods Series, 9

English and Ethnicity by Brutt-Griffler & Davies (2007)

Brutt-Griffler, J., & Davies, C. E. (Eds.). (2007). English and ethnicity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

           This compilation of studies takes on the interaction of English with and across ethnicities. The majority of research in this collection comprises essays that employ ethnographic dimensions.

            Parts of the volume are definitive of their content and intent. Headings include Framework (pp. 19-106), Representation (pp. 107-158), Contexts (pp. 159-216), and Connections (pp. 217-300) for parts 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. An interesting feature in this collection is the deliberate manifestation of attempts to respond to the challenges of certain traditional assumptions and frameworks. That is to say, conceptualizations of the notions of identity, ethnicity and language, though intricate, must be exclusively identifiable in methods and analysis. In addition, the studies suggest that such conceptualizations must transcend “race” and show perspectives on current ideological struggles in different areas.

The reported dynamism in incorporating new variables is shaping a better understanding in the field. It has been recognized in this volume that trends on analyses considered conversation analysis, or discourse, as some studies took a “sociolinguistic turn”. Social organization is also considered to have links to ethnicity and language use. This has brought out ‘creative’ aspects of language use by speakers in their respective speech community and community of practice. Sadly, studies that considered possible acculturation on ethnicities in an English dominant, i.e., workplace, setting are unavailable. This perspective can be justified with the globalization of English use across borders and setting.

These developments show a dominant picture of diversity. The editors, however, felt that diversity, of individuals and groups, does not necessary equal to hybridity. They safely placed the volume by saying that English “serves in many complex ways as a resource for the representation of ethnicity as an aspect of sociocultural identity” (p.11). Furthermore, the language in study is “simultaneously both a unifying and diversifying force” (p. 11).

Applied Linguistics Blog: Introduction

Hello applied linguists! I am Kevin, an applied linguistics student.

At Fall 2015, I moved to California from the Philippines for my graduate studies. Knowing that I would be writing a lot about applied linguistics and its areas of scope, I decided to make a blog to document my insights. This blog will present my take on a journal, book, article, and discussion that I feel would be helpful to other students and aspiring applied linguists.

Finally, you are very welcome to comment, and maybe we can build a community!

God be glorified.

P.S. If you have a blog which is similar in nature, kindly message me so I can connect to it. Thank you!