The creation of monolanguaging space in akrámáJavanese language performance

Abstract

Recent approaches to multilingualism, such as translanguaging, emphasize the porous, fluid, and hybrid nature of language use. This article intends to show, through an example of a local language debating competition in Central Java, that culturally emblematic performances tend to create monolanguaging spaces, due to their monolingual focusing on certain language varieties that are iconic to local ethnolinguistic identity. Monolanguaging spaces are language ideological spaces in which speakers project an idealized performance of their ethnolinguistic identity. Ethnographic observation shows that the performance of monolanguaging spaces involves the erasure of speakers’ multilingual repertoires and translanguaging practices, in accordance to the language ideology surrounding the hegemonic prestigious language variety and in accordance to the local norms of status or power-based social interaction. Attending to monolanguaging spaces reveal it as a performance accomplished through discursive work and power relations, involving the misrecognition of its connection and dissonance to multilingual repertoires and practices. (Language ideology, erasure, translanguaging, monolanguaging space, performance, ethnolinguistic identity, Javanese)*

Dialogic landscapes: Toward a nuanced understanding of globalization in urban Indonesian signage

“…Nonetheless, in reviewing the data, we saw patterns in which Indonesians can use fluid language practices but for communicative purposes oriented to fixed notions of language and culture (cf. Tamtomo, 2019). The signage we select as examples provide indexical stories (Blommaert, 2013) that illustrate such patterns of dialogic interconnection.…”

Ideologías Lingüísticas Como Sistemas De Representaciones Sociales: Una Propuesta Teórica Interdisciplinaria

“…La evidencia empírica generada a lo largo de las últimas dos décadas, en contextos diversos, da cuenta de la pertinencia del esquema de Irvine y Gal (2000) para comprender los procesos de construcción de las ideologías lingüísticas (Kudriavtseva, 2020;Milani, 2010;Park, 2008;Petrucci, 2015;Rojas, 2013;Tamtomo, 2019;Webster, 2008). En efecto, esta perspectiva entrega una arquitectura teórica que permite un análisis de discurso orientado a develar el modo en que el hablante reduce la complejidad del campo lingüístico para formar o adoptar ciertas representaciones sobre aquel.…”

Towards developing colloquial Indonesian language pedagogy: A corpus analysis

“…"L" or "low" variety), a second, highly codified variety (labeled "H" or "high") is used in certain situations such as literature, formal education, or other specific settings, but not used for ordinary conversation (Errington, 2014;Ferguson, 1959). The reality of the Indonesian linguistic landscape is much more complex than the diglossic paradigm that is addressed in this article when regional languages and dialects are brought into consideration (Tamtomo, 2019). This article primarily addresses the Jakartan-origin middle variant that we hypothesise has become the common contemporary spoken language of Indonesian popular culture.…”