Tværsproglighedens veje: Om sproglig bevidsthed, tværsproglighed og didaktisk forandringsarbejde i en folkeskolekontekst

Unfolding language awareness in a plurilingual context: A study of metalinguistic, practical, and critical language awareness

“…While this study focuses on students' LA in the context of plurilingual teaching, it does not focus on the teaching itself, and thus no conclusions can be drawn as to the exact relationship between the pluralistic approach chosen and the forms of LA described. Nonetheless, the wealth of LA manifestations observed reaffirms the usefulness of plurilingual approaches for establishing affordances for LA shown by previous studies (Candelier, 2017;Daryai-Hansen et al, 2015;Gorp & Verheyen, 2018;Hélot et al, 2018;Hofer & Jessner, 2019;Krogager Andersen, 2020). In this case, the teaching activities and materials had been developed by the teachers and researcher in collaboration and planned with the specific aim of establishing plurilingual affordances for LA.…”

“…MLA covers a range of metalinguistic practices, all characterized by focusing on language at a metalevel, that is, taking linguistic form and/or meaning as its object. This includes metalanguage, metalinguistic reflection, explicit metalinguistic knowledge, and metalinguistic analysis (Bialystok, 1986;Gombert, 1992;Krogager Andersen, 2020;Wildemann et al, 2016). This dimension draws on the cognitive aspect of LA as defined by James and Garrett (1992) and MLA as investigated by Bialystok (2009Bialystok ( , 2011Bialystok ( , 2018 and Jessner and Allgäuer-Hackl (2020), among others.…”

“…This dimension covers a range of linguistic practices indicating awareness of language, characterized in the words of van Lier (2004) by an element of active control. These practices may be spontaneous and intuitive, and take the form of language play (Laursen, 2019; van Lier, 2004), linguistic fantasy and creativity (Krogager Andersen, 2020; van Lier, 2004), or the “willful manipulation of linguistic resources” (van Lier, 1998, p. 132). In the classroom context, this dimension is especially important to consider, since some of its forms (such as language play) may often occur “på randen af undervisningen [at the fringes of the teaching activity]” (Krogager Andersen, 2020, p. 187) and thus be overlooked by teachers, whereas others (such as creative writing or translation) are recognized and highly appreciated.…”

“…Studies exploring LA in schools have shown not only MLA, including academic skills like metalanguage, metalinguistic knowledge, and linguistic analysis, but also PLA, including linguistic creativity and control and manipulation of language to be relevant for the classroom context (Daugaard, 2015; Krogager Andersen, 2020; Laursen, 2019). Wallace (2018) argued that this is the case for CLA, too.…”

“…The classroom context requires a specific perspective on LA as a sociocognitive phenomenon observable in student discourse and forms of engagement with language (Svalberg, 2009). Comparable conceptualizations of LA have been used by existing classroom‐based studies, describing, for example, LA moments (Gorp & Verheyen, 2018), metalanguaging (Laursen, 2019; Laursen et al., 2018), or language‐aware student practices (Krogager Andersen, 2020).…”