Leading for Linguistic Justice and Language Revitalization

Podcast Transcript

We are grateful to Sonia Martin and panelists for helping us deepen our thinking around what linguistic justice entails and making connections between ideas that are important to us.

By: Sonia Martin 

In this introduction to Leading for Linguistic Justice, I begin with an overview of some pervasive linguistic injustices. I then share two paradigms that may support context-specific advancements toward linguistic justice. I conclude with questions for reflection. This introduction includes specific examples from Canada, but you are invited to consider the relevance of these issues and concepts to your own context(s). 

Overview of Linguistic Injustices

Language is elemental to academic, professional, and social systems. In schools, as in most institutions, language is both naturalized and objectified: we produce language fluidly without thinking about it, but we also reify it, upholding rigid expectations of correct language usage. Many language rules are socio-political constructs, not laws of nature. It is important to pay attention to which language practices feel normal and why. Language usage can create and maintain, but also break down, social injustices. When we raise our awareness and challenge supposedly commonsense notions about our language practices, we can understand how linguistic justice supports all forms of liberation, on the basis of race, climate, gender, class, etc. (García, 2017).   

Consider the notion of standardized languages, like Standard English. One commonsense notion about Standard English is that it supports effective communication. Nonetheless, linguists have demonstrated that many aspects of the standardized form are not required (e.g. Seidlhofer, 2004). Empirical research demonstrates that grammatical correctness does not guarantee or even support effective communication (Seidlhofer, 2017). For example, the third-person singular S (as in she writes) is redundant (Seidlhofer, 2004). If I say, she write books, my meaning is clear because the subject, she, indicates who is writing, so the verb does not need to fulfill that role. In fact, many speakers even create non-standard forms to enable communication (Seidlhofer, 2017). Meanwhile, many English language teachers continue to drill prescriptive grammar rules like the third-person singular S. What purpose does this serve?

NOTE: for the rest of this overview section, i will write without two standardized rules that are not required for conveying meaning: the third person singular s and capital letters. i will make a few exceptions. i will not change the capitalization of direct quotations. i will capitalize people’s names because i do not want to offend anyone (an indication of the power of standard language). most importantly, i will capitalize Black, Indigenous, and Truth and Reconciliation to counter historic and present delegitimization. these exceptions are an indication that one-size-fits-all approaches do not apply to equity work, even when challenging oppressive norms like standard english. notice if these changes prevent you from understanding the meaning of the text.  pay attention to any judgements or insights that emerge from this exercise. what are you thinking that you might want to analyze a bit deeper? 

in settler colonial countries like canada, the roots of standard language stem from european nation-building practices. the homogenization of language was meant to support a sense of unity while schooling children to become loyal citizens to a particular nation-state (Gogolin, 1997). nation-states that do not have linguistically homogenous citizenry sometimes create federal policies like canada’s official languages act (ola). the ola was adopted in 1969 to strengthen unity between the two colonial powers, the english and the french (Haque, 2019). one of the goals of the ola is to ensure equal status between french and english. since english is a dominant language in more of the country than french, this task include ensuring linguistic security for french, particularly in english dominant areas. the ola has been successful. french enjoy privileged status with federal funding for french services and education, and the number of french speakers has increased (Miller, 2023). while linguistic security is important, there is a cost to elevating two languages above all others. Galante (2021), a university professor, explains:  

Despite having Portuguese, Spanish, English, and Italian in my repertoire, I have never been considered bilingual in Canada because I do not speak French perfectly yet. The popular discourse of being bilingual here places value on the two official languages only, and even if you speak both languages, you need to sound like a native speaker or you will have your bilingual identity stripped away from you. This issue causes language insecurity and anxiety and demotivates people to learn languages. It is time to rethink what bilingualism means, recognize that Canada is a multilingual country, and focus on innovating language education. (para. 1)  

the reality is that policies like the ola prioritize the language(s) of those in power which help to cement their power (Tamang, 2009). all other languages, including Indigenous languages, become unofficial. furthermore, the process of legitimizing official languages lead to the belief in “a pure standard language” (Seidlhofer, 2017, p. 95), an idealized notion that do not reflect the evolving and creative aspects of language. from this perspective, non-standard forms of official languages, and languages that are unofficial, are rendered inferior. such stratification of languages create and reproduce social hierarchies.  

take, for example, the connection between linguistic stratification and racism.  because the federal government of canada was imposed by white people, the official languages in canada are considered white property—a "quality, trait or attribute" that white people supposedly possess naturally (Pendergast, 2003, as cited in Sterzuk, 2015, p. 55). one way to maintain the privileged status held by white canadians is to assert ownership of english and french by othering varieties spoken by racialized people (Sterzuk, 2015). this is an example of a raciolinguistic ideology whereby the language performance of people who are racialized is positioned as inferior, no matter how they communicate (Flores & Rosa, 2015).  

such linguistic racism is present in formal institutional policies as well as everyday personal and professional interactions. in some canadian school districts, a Black student from jamaica would likely be placed in an english language learner/english skills development program while their white counterpart from scotland would be integrated into the mainstream language class, even though both students speak english as a first language and both speak a variety that differs significantly from canadian standard english (Elep, 2022; ontario ministry of education, 2022). many employers in canada expect certain foreign-sounding workers to change their accent to make it more intelligible, which “ends up being about vocal ‘whitening’” (Ramjattan, 2022, p. 88). pushing back against linguistic racism, one university student state, “‘their expectation is that everyone should speak this way. And I know other languages, so ... I just construct language a little differently. So maybe you can open your mind a little bit and consider that someone else IS proficient in English AND wants to communicate this way’” (Kubota et al., 2023, p. 773). 

the prioritization of standardized language(s) contribute to linguistic hegemony (Silverstein, 1998)—a monolingual bias wherein the dominant language is considered the norm (Gogolin, 1997). non-mainstream language is considered an obstacle to success (Montsion et al., 2023). when the standard is considered white property, linguistic hegemony is equivalent to white supremacy (Von Esch et al., 2020). to highlight the associated whiteness of standard english, scholars who study the connection between race, language, and power have relabeled standard english with the more accurate term white mainstream english (e.g. Baker-Bell, 2020). how might applying this label change institutional policy? if you were tasked with upholding white mainstream english instead of standard english, how/would it change your position or actions?  

race is just one example of how white mainstream english is exclusionary. it is easy to find examples of sexism, ableism, and classism inherent in this form of english. there are obvious examples of sexist usage like mankind and to each his own, but also less apparent ones like the semantic differences between governor and governess (Umera-Okeke, 2012). a governor is a head of state whereas a governess is a nanny.  one common ableist usage is the abundance of blind as a metaphor, as in blind peer review. Schalk (2013) exemplify how the many instances of blind in white mainstream english connote lack of knowledge or inability to know. regarding classism, Ardoin (2018), a cajun academic, point to the supposed lower status of words like folks, a common term used in her culture that she was told by anonymous peer reviewers to remove from academic papers. these few examples may seem minor when examined individually, but the more you think about it, the more examples you can find. considered together, their abundance point to the inherent attitudes embedded in the language. white mainstream english is not a neutral language.   

for Indigenous peoples who live on lands superimposed by nation-states, this linguistic hegemony is particularly violent as it is coupled with attempts at linguicide. pre-european contact, there were approximately 450 Indigenous languages and language varieties on the land we now call canada (Tamang, 2009). canadian education policies have played an instrumental role in forcibly preventing Indigenous children from learning their ancestral languages (Hare, 2007). while Indigenous languages and cultures are diverse, one commonality is that “'language is the life blood of a people’” (Aboriginal Head Start Association of British Columbia, 2011, as cited in Ball and McIvor, 2013). Indigenous languages carry values and knowledge of kinship; they support identity formation and spirituality. english, or any other colonial language, cannot replace the “collective cognitive experience” (Battiste, 1998, p. 18) that Indigenous languages foster. continual active resistance and protection by Indigenous activists, educators, elders, and communities has ensured that at least 11 Indigenous language families representing more than 60 languages have survived (Battiste & Henderson, 2021).  since the 1970s, canadian federal, provincial, and territorial governments have made some changes to legislation to end linguicide, declare official status to Indigenous languages in some regions, and fund Indigenous language classes (Tamang, 2009). however, implementation of these policies has been extremely slow (Ball & McIvor, 2013), a demonstration of the government’s apathy on redressing colonial harm (Styres, 2020). in 2015, canada’s Truth and Reconciliation commission (TRc), which arose from Indigenous advocacy, published 94 calls to action, and “identified education as a critical site for Indigenous resurgence with ministries of education and school boards pushing for teachers to implement its Calls to Action in their classrooms” (Styres, 2020, p. 157). since then, educational institutions have doubled down on implementing decolonial policies that address the TRc calls to action, which include teaching Indigenous languages and protecting the right to Indigenous languages (Truth and Reconciliation commission of canada, 2015, p. 2). yet, many educators “have little connection, knowledge or a clear framework to teach the material properly” (Unreserved, 2019, para. 3). in 2019, the federal government implemented the Indigenous languages act (Ila) “to preserve, promote and revitalize Indigenous languages in Canada, with long-term predictable funding to support the implementation of the Act” (canadian heritage, 2021, para. 1). however promising this may be, Indigenous languages are still placed in a lesser position than english and french. in fact, groups eligible for Ila funding must provide reports to the government in one of the official languages, a situation Haque (2023) calls “the ola in the Ila,” the official languages act in the Indigenous languages act.  

Paradigm Shifts for Linguistic Justice 

anti-oppression activists and scholars often explain that there are no quick fixes or one-size fits all solutions to complex issues like linguistic injustice. it is important to consider paradigm shifts that support the creation of context-specific practices (Canagarajah & Liyanage, 2012).  

one paradigm shift is the notion that language is not a disembodied object that can be separated from communities (Charity Hudley & Flores, 2022). language requires and is subject to relationality. this also extends beyond human-to-human interaction (Siragusa & Virtanen, 2021). there is a relationship between biodiversity and linguistic diversity: “70% of the world’s languages are found in the 25% of the planet’s land area that is considered either a ‘biodiversity hot spot’ or a ‘high-biodiversity wilderness area’” (Skutnabb-Kangas & Harmon, 2017, p. 14).  a large proportion of these languages are Indigenous, which are under threat of extinction because of colonial violence. knowledge about maintaining biodiversity will disappear if these languages die (Skutnabb-Kangas & Harmon, 2017). Indigenous environmental activist and lawyer, Deborah McGregor state “language action is climate action” (Callison et al., 2023). adopting an understanding of languages as embodied relational actions, rather than tools for manipulation, can inspire a sense of responsibility and the caretaking of languages and the environment.  

another promising ideological shift away from linguistic hegemony is the notion of plurilingualism which focus on meaning making rather than on accurate language usage. plurilingual attitudes and pedagogies affirm multiple linguistic and communicative skills. people are encouraged to draw on all communicative resources to negotiate meaning.  plurilingualism require synergy and serendipity over grammatical accuracy or advanced language proficiency:  

‘Synergy’ captures the creative agency subjects must exert in order to work jointly with the other participant to accomplish intersubjective meaning. ‘Serendipity’ involves an attitudinal transformation. To accept ‘deviations as the norm’ one must display ‘positive attitudes to variation’ and be ‘open to unexpectedness’. Subjects have to be radically other-centred. They have to be imaginative and alert to make on-the-spot decisions in relation to the forms and conventions employed by the other.” (Khubchandani, 1997, as cited in Canagarajah & Liyanage, 2012, p. 55) 

with plurilingualism, a sense of unity grows through diversity as communities develop ways to interpret and negotiate together (Canagarajah & Liyanage, 2012). 

Kubota (2020) point out that conceptualizing plurilingualism and other forms of anti-oppressive language practices is important, but little will change if structural barriers are not transformed, such as hiring practices, academic writing policies, and language requirements for citizenship, to name a few. without systemic change, plurilingual attitudes and pedagogies may end up reproducing the status quo as people with privilege become freer to use language as they choose while people who are marginalized must still conform to survive.  

any discussion of language, even regarding possibilities for change like paradigm shifts, must be held in relation to current societal oppressions. language is more than a tool; language is an embodied experience. we all have within us the linguistic faculties to create equitable and just language practices.

Questions for Reflection 

1. What needs to happen for educational leaders to integrate and support Indigenous language resurgence and broader language revitalization efforts?  
2. What are the benefits and challenges of fostering multi/plurilingualism and embracing multi-accents in institutions?  
3. (How) can educational leaders advocate for plurilingual pedagogies when standardized language is both the medium of instruction and the expected outcome of learning? 
4. What shifts can be made to support community-building that validates and prioritizes linguistic diversity?  
5. How can educational leaders support the use of technology for ease of communication across languages even while popular language tech tools perpetuate oppressive language standards? 

¹ Special Thanks
I would like to thank Dr. Vidya Shah for her feedback on this essay and for sharing this important point about one-size-fits all approaches.

References 

Ardoin, S. (2018, November 6). Scrutinizing language is a form of classism. NAPSA. https://www.naspa.org/blog/scrutinizing-language-is-a-form-of-classism 

Baker-Bell, A. (2020). Dismantling anti-Black linguistic racism in English language arts classrooms: Toward an Anti-Racist Black Language Pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 59(1), 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1665415 

Ball, J., & McIvor, O. (2013). Canada’s big chill. In C. Benson & K. Kosonen (Eds.), Language issues in comparative education: Inclusive teaching and learning in non-dominant languages and cultures (pp. 19–38). SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-218-1_2 

Battiste, M. (1998). Enabling the autumn seed: Toward a decolonized approach to Aboriginal knowledge, language, and education. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 22(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.14288/cjne.v22i1.195792 

Battiste, M., & Henderson, S. (2021). Indigenous and trans-systemic knowledge systems (ᐃᐣdᐃgᐁᓅᐢ ᐠᓄᐤᐪᐁdgᐁ ᐊᐣd ᐟᕒᐊᐣᐢᐢᐩᐢᑌᒥᐨ ᐠᓄᐤᐪᐁdgᐁ ᐢᐩᐢᑌᒼᐢ). Engaged Scholar Journal: Community-Engaged Research, Teaching, and Learning, 7(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.15402/esj.v7i1.70768 

Callison, C., McGregor, D., & Klein, N. (2023, May 31). Indigenous knowing and climate futures: EUC Congress event with Candis Callison, Naomi Klein and Deborah McGregor [Keynote panel]. Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences 2023: Reckonings and re-imaginings, York University. https://euc.yorku.ca/news-story/indigenous-knowing-and-climate-futures-euc-congress-event-with-candis-callison-naomi-klein-and-deborah-mcgregor/ 

Canadian Heritage. (2021, August 31). Indigenous Languages Act. Government of Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/corporate/transparency/open-government/standing-committee/dm-transition-material-2021/indigenous-languages-act.html 

Canagarajah, S., & Liyanage, I. (2012). Lessons from pre-colonial multilingualism. In The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism. Routledge. 

Charity Hudley, A. H., & Flores, N. (2022). Social justice in applied linguistics: Not a conclusion, but a way forward. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 144–154. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190522000083 

Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149 

García, O. (2017). Critical multilingual language awareness and teacher education. In J. Cenoz, D. Gorter, & S. May (Eds.), Language Awareness and Multilingualism (pp. 263–280). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02240-6_30 

Gogolin, I. (1997). The “monolingual habitus” as the common feature in teaching in the language of the majority in different countries. Per Linguam, 13(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.5785/13-2-187 

Haque, E. (2019). A Foucauldian approach to language policy in Canada. In T. Ricento (Ed.), Language politics and policies: Perspectives from Canada and the United States (pp. 232–243). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108684804.013 

Haque, E. (2023, May 27). Social justice and the legacy of Canadian language policy regimes. Language and Literacy Researchers of Canada 2023 Pre-Conference - Language and Literacy: Reckoning with our Past, Interrogating our Present, and Reimagining our Future, York University. 

Hare, J. (2007). First Nations education policy in Canada: Building capacity for change and control. In L. Johnson & R. Joshee (Eds.), Multicultural education policies in Canada and the United States (pp. 51–68). https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/jcie/index.php/JCIE/article/view/4578 

Kubota, R. (2020). Promoting and problematizing multi/plural approaches in language pedagogy. In S. Van Viegen & S. M. C. Lao (Eds.), Plurilingual Pedagogies: Critical and Creative Endeavors for Equitable Language in Education. Springer International Publishing AG. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/york/detail.action?docID=6173632 

Kubota, R., Corella, M., Lim, K., & Sah, P. K. (2023). “Your English is so good”: Linguistic experiences of racialized students and instructors of a Canadian university. Ethnicities, 23(5), 758–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687968211055808   

Kumashiro, K. K. (2009). Against common sense: Teaching and learning toward social justice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203870068   

Miller, G. (2022). Is bilingualism in peril in Canada? (3, Fall 2022) [Audio recording]. Retrieved December 1, 2023, from https://www.federationhss.ca/en/bilingualism-peril-canada   

Montsion, J. M., Kim, A. H., & Buckner, E. (2023). Conclusion: Building on success from the bottom-up? Institutional challenges, racialized experiences, and opportunities for further research. In A. Kim, E. Buckner, & J. M. Montsion (Eds.), International students from asia in canadian universities (pp. 243–253). Routledge. 

Ramjattan, V. A. (2022). Accenting racism in labour migration. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190521000143  

Schalk, S. (2013). Metaphorically speaking: Ableist metaphors in feminist writing. Disability Studies Quarterly, 33(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3874 

Seidlhofer, B. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209–239. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190504000145 

Seidlhofer, B. (2017). Standard English and the dynamics of ELF variation. In The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca. Routledge. 

Silverstein, M. (1998). Monoglot “Standard” in America: Standardization and metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In The Matrix Of Language. Routledge. 

Siragusa, L., Westman, C. N., & Moritz, S. C. (2020). Shared breath: Human and nonhuman copresence through ritualized words and beyond. Current Anthropology, 61(4), 471–494. https://doi.org/10.1086/710139 

Skutnabb-Kangas, T., & Harmon, D. (2017). Biological diversity and language diversity: Parallels and differences. In A. F. Fill & H. Penz (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Ecolinguistics (pp. 11–25). Routledge. 

Sterzuk, A. (2015). ‘The standard remains the same’: Language standardisation, race and othering in higher education. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 36(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2014.892501 

Styres, S. (2020). Reconcili action: Reconciling contestation in the academy. Power and Education, 12(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757743820916845 

Tamang, R. (2009). Belonging and boundaries: Linguistic diversity and language rights in Canada. Buckingham Journal of Language & Linguistics, 2(1), 81–98. 

Umera-Okeke, N. (2012). Linguistic sexism: An overview of the English language in everyday discourse. AFRREV LALIGENS: An International Journal of Language, Literature and Gender Studies, 1(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.4314/laligens.v1i1 

Unreserved. (2019, January 25). “There’s no quick fix”: Advice for teachers struggling to properly integrate Indigenous content into classes. CBC Radio. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/unreserved/they-don-t-know-what-they-don-t-know-teachers-reach-out-for-tips-on-integrating-indigenous-content-1.4990312/there-s-no-quick-fix-advice-for-teachers-struggling-to-properly-integrate-indigenous-content-into-classes-1.4990390 

Von Esch, K. S. V., Motha, S., & Kubota, R. (2020). Race and language teaching. Language Teaching, 53(4), 391–421. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000269 

Additional Recommended Resources: 

University Writing Center. (2023, March). What is linguistic justice? University Writing Center.  https://criminal-justice.ecu.edu/wp-content/pv-uploads/sites/72/2023/03/Linguistic-Justice.pdf

Ball., J (2024). Multilingual education: Mother tongue and language rights. Early Childhood Development Intercultural Partnership. https://ecdip.org/multilingual-education/ Balyasnikova, N., & Kubota, R. (2022). "Chapter 4 Language Teaching for Intercultural Communication: Problematizing Essentialism, Highlighting Power, and Advocating for Social Justice". In Intercultural Twinnings. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/10.1163/9789004524545_004

Panelist Bios