This paper focuses on an issue attracting increasing attention: the possible disadvantage inflicted on non-Anglophone academics by the dominance of English in scientific publication and academic exchange. We critically review the evidence for linguistic disadvantage, noting some of its limitations, and critique the native/non-native distinction as a coarse and somewhat unsatisfactory criterion for distinguishing between the advantaged and disadvantaged. In the second part of the paper we report on an empirical survey of the attitudes of Spanish academics at the University of Zaragoza to the possible disadvantage they may experience in publishing in English, and we investigate determinants of these attitudes. Though the survey shows, as expected, that a majority do feel disadvantaged in academic publication relative to Anglophone scholars, it also indicates, we argue, that attitudes are more complex and multidimensional than the literature sometimes suggests. Self-reported language proficiency emerges as a significant determinant of attitudes. The final part of the paper discusses a number of proposed language planning interventions designed to redress linguistic disadvantage. We argue that some of the more radical of these are flawed or unfeasible and suggest that more modest measures have a greater likelihood of ameliorating the situation.

Code-Switching in the classroom across a range of curricular subjects is a widespread phenomenon in multilingual, language contact settings in Africa and, indeed, world-wide; yet it is not infrequently regarded unfavourably by educational policy-makers. This paper reviews the literature on classroom functions of code-switching in post-colonial contexts, commenting on the merits and limitations of recent research. It also examines some of the conceptions of language underlying official and lay attitudes. Finally, as befits a paper examining classroom codeþswitching from the somewhat unusual perspective of language planning in education, it evaluates a number of policy proposals addressing the issue of how code-switching might more effectively be exploited as a communicative and pedagogic resource in instruction. The paper overall is constructed so as to inform the attitudes, practices and policies of policy-makers, teacher educators and teachers.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract