In the wake of globalisation and contemporary mobilities, there is now greater linguistic diversity in school populations in minoritised language contexts. Taking account of this, some researchers and educational practitioners working in such contexts have begun to explore the potential of translanguaging as part of an overall pedagogic strategy, while others still advocate language separation and the creation of ‘language sanctuaries’. However, as we contemplate a move toward translanguaging, we need to be aware that it has been conceptualised in different ways, within the academy and beyond, over the last two decades. As Jaspers and Madsen (2016:235) have pointed out, given the current intense interest in terms such as translanguaging, in this and other fields of language education, it is time to take stock of “their occurrence, provenance and pertinence for future research”.
This paper has four aims:
(1.) To trace the provenance and conceptual trajectory of the term translanguaging, beginning with its use in pedagogically-oriented research in Wales (Williams, 1994, 1996), and in general prescriptions regarding ‘bilingual’ education (Baker, 2001; Garcia, 2009).
(2.) To draw attention to the ontological and epistemological differences between this early research and more recent work (e.g. Creese and Blackledge, 2010; Garcia and Li Wei, 2014). In recent research, translanguaging has been substantially reconceptualised following the turn towards post-structuralism and post-modernism in sociolinguistics, and the critique of the long-dominant view of ‘languages’ as fixed, bounded and enumerable objects (e.g. Makoni and Pennycook, 2007).
(3.) To make the case for research of a critical sociolinguistic and ethnographic nature, focusing on situated translanguaging practices in different institutional settings, with different histories and regimes of language. We share with Jaspers and Madsen (2016: 251) the conviction that any pedagogical benefits that accrue from translanguaging in classrooms should be “a matter of empirical concern rather than a theoretical starting point”.
(4.) To substantiate these lines of argument with reference to two minoritised languages: Welsh and Scottish Gaelic. We refer to ongoing debates about language pedagogy in these contexts and we consider the nature and scope of research that could inform language policy and pedagogy.
