Teasing out the tensions between English monolingualism vs. plurilingualism in European academic and research settings

Pérez-Llantada, Carmen

doi:10.1515/9781614516378-018

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Introduction1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2021

Publication Types

Select...

Book1

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here, the preferencing of English within academic domains remains more contested, with mounting concerns not only regarding linguistic inequality (Ammon 2012) and domain loss, but also changes in discourse patterns within academic English (Pérez-Llantada 2015). While some national academic communities (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language as gate-keeper of quality? Exploring Austria’s English-only policy for national research funding

Earls¹

Multilingualism and English in Twenty-First-Century Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language as gate-keeper of quality? Exploring Austria’s English-only policy for national research funding

Earls¹

Multilingualism and English in Twenty-First-Century Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two types of reflections about English as a medium of instruction

Gabriëls

Wilkinson

2021

European Journal of Language Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The worldwide introduction of English as a medium of instruction (EMI) programmes has stimulated numerous reflections within and outside academia. These reflections find their expression in both scholarly studies into EMI and public debates about its impact. In this article we argue that one can distinguish two types of reflections about EMI. The first type focuses on improving EMI. The second type focuses on the legitimation of EMI, that is whether EMI programmes are justified in view of their assumptions and consequences. We investigate the genesis and the differences between two separate discourses that express the different types of reflections. We unfold a history that shows that roughly three phases can be distinguished in the development of EMI: the incubation of EMI, its consolidation and its politicisation. We argue that the heuristic value of the two types of reflection is that they are conducive to comprehending this development of EMI and look at it with critical eyes. In addition, we suggest that politicised issues like the impact of Englishization on the cultural identity, language hierarchies, top-down implementations of language policies and the inequalities regarding the access to EMI programmes might be fruitfully addressed in terms of linguistic justice and democracy. By distinguishing two types of reflection, blind spots in EMI research can be revealed.

show abstract

Teasing out the tensions between English monolingualism vs. plurilingualism in European academic and research settings

Cited by 2 publications

References 10 publications

Language as gate-keeper of quality? Exploring Austria’s English-only policy for national research funding

Language as gate-keeper of quality? Exploring Austria’s English-only policy for national research funding

Two types of reflections about English as a medium of instruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About