"Language Difference in Writing: Toward a Translingual Approach:" Executive Summary

 

     This article introduces the reader to some of the issues and approaches dealt with in Canagarajah'a article in regards to trying to incorporate diverse linguistic flavors into an English-oriented curriculum. Some intial points made by the opinion article  are that even a mono linguistic, English speaker can technically be multilingual and the NCTE and CCCC encourage this type of idology. Early on, also, it is indicated that a monolingualist can achieve a certain level of "translingualism."  This is due, in part, to the many dialects and spheres in which “standard” English operates. There is also a distinction made between what “standard” English is and what “edited American English” is. The latter would be something done in an academic setting, such as an essay. Three objectives are outlined in is article as to what translingualism, in a classroom, would appreciate: (1) honoring the power of all language users to shape language to specific ends; (2) recognizing the linguistic heterogeneity of all users of language both within the United States and globally; and (3) directly confronting English monolingualist expectations by researching and teaching how writers can work with and against, not simply within, those expectations.

   The authors explain that they wish to only understand language better and not necessarily just English. They see this initiative as exploring the hows, whys and whats of language. The authors of this move in teaching plan for this agenda to infiltrate all layers of society, from the working class person to the college student. The authors of this paper see the exploring of various linguistic styles, as implemented into the classroom, to be a form of democracy and granting civil rights to all. It is intended to take traditional views of composition and bend them enough as to where this “translingualism” will become the standard in how to deal with “English” and  other (ESL) students coming into a composition classroom.

     At the paper's conclusion, a series of questions about this type of teaching are posed by the authors and it's contributors. The questions help to explore the actual utility of translingualism and what it would look like in a classroom. Questions like “How can a a monolingual instructor teach such a class? My students are all monolingual, do they need to learn a multilingual approach to composition? Doesn't one need to master his/her native tongue before trying this type of approach?” are all asked by this paper. The responses to these qustions, although slightly indirect and posed by the researchers themselves, indicated a positive response in favor of a translingual approach to reading/writing. Go figure.