Assignment 1
Hello! I invite you to check my Mindmap related to the reading “A Trans-semiotizing and re-sourcing resources in language education: Towards a multimodal social semiotic perspective on intercultural communication.”
- Here's the link in case you want to make the image bigger: https://www.mindmeister.com/3806350743/trans-semiotizing-and-re-sourcing-resources-in-le
For me, Translanguaging can be understood as the use of all our linguistic repertoires when we are communicating in a bi/multilingual context. Based on this meaning, both Álvarez Valencia and Li highlight this practice usefulness for reshaping our views on language. Nevertheless, Álvarez Valencia clarifies that the term translanguaging makes emphasis on the privilege of language (linguistic practice), which “carries the legacy of a verbocentric perspective of language” (p. 180). For this reason, the author makes emphasis on the use of tras-semiotizing, since we should use semiotic repertoires rather than linguistic repertoires when talking about multilingual contexts. These semiotic repertoires include, on the one hand, resources like gestures used in the meaning-making process, and on the other hand, social languages, styles, genres, and registers during a bi/multilingual encounter (Álvarez Valencia, 2021). Additionally, Álvarez Valencia explains that the idea of trans-semiotizing includes the term translanguaging, making it then unnecessary to use both, as some authors prefer. In addition to this, Álvarez Valencia links tran-semiotic practices with the decolonization of education, which suggests that we should question the “status of language as the main meaning carrier” (p. 181) and allow room for other modes to be recognized.
ReplyDeleteContrastingly, Li clarifies that “human communication has always been multimodal” (p.21), and implies that this multimodality is included in the term translaguaging. He explains that this concept “reconceptualizes language as a multilingual, multisemiotic, multisensory, and multimodal resource for sense- and meaning-making” (p. 22).
So, even if both authors recognize all the multiplicities that communication brings together, the difference lies in the terminology used and the emphasis that one word or the other may imply. However, it is important to clarify that these implications in a word are not superficial, because they may perpetuate notions or views on language that leave aside essential components. Ignoring certain elements indicates that we are again prioritizing characteristics from the historically prevailing modes of communication, in this case, linguistic practice, and invisibilizing other modes.
Dear Carolina,
DeleteThanks for sharing your mind map. It was really interesting to see how you highlighted the key points in Álvarez-Valencia’s article without losing the essence and the connection with language teaching and learning.
About your post, I totally agree with you when you mention that maintaining the term: “translanguaging”, as Wei did, can contribute to continue privileging the linguistic repertoires over the semiotic ones because I think that those choices of terminology can influence different decisions within the classroom activities, ways of assessment, the language policies and curriculum design among other aspects that are permeated by something that seems simple as a term but that really affects the decision making and meaning making in social contexts.
Finally, I would like to ask what limitations or difficulties do you think language teachers can encounter when trying to implement what trans-semiotizing implies?
Thank you 😊
Yuranny
Jhonny Segura. The way you designed your mind map demonstrates a clear and compelling attempt to synthesize Álvarez's ideas. You effectively identify the main concepts, including social semiotics, re-sourcing, and cultural semiotics resources, as well as trans-semiotizing. Each branch is supported by notes that demonstrate understanding, and the links between multimodality and, most importantly, the description of re-sourcing as a transformative action to address disparities.
ReplyDeleteIn your mind map, you give predominance to "Re-sourcing" as one of the key concepts of the map, which shows your interest in emphasizing the practical contributions of transformative pedagogies. I would suggest mentioning Álvarez's critique of translanguaging to introduce how his proposal goes beyond the linguistic repertoire as a source of meaning construction. Besides, I believe that's something I also need to refine in my mind map. When presenting concepts in parallel across too many separate branches, there is a risk of presenting information without highlighting interconnections. I guess that's something I also need to revise in mine.
Hey Carolina! I love your mind map because of the way your were able to organize all your information into different clusters, which helps me better understand these concepts. Also, it's great that you used color and images to make your mind map easier to navigate...I couldn't figure out how to do that!
ReplyDeleteTo respond to your reflection on the two readings, I agree with you when you point out that both authors emphasize multimodal linguistics and that translanguaging is an important step to start moving beyond verbocentrism. I really think it is important when you say that Álvarez Valencia states that translanguaging emphasizing the privilege of language (linguistic practice), which is why trans-semiotizing is an important step to avoid privileging language alone. On the other hand, Wei decides to keep translanguaging but also expands it to include and focus on multimodality.
Finally, I wanted to ask you this question as a reflection on your reflection: how do you think that the choice between trans-semiotizing or translanguaging could affect the manner in which teachers recognize, value, and support their students' diverse communicative repertoire in the classroom setting?
Thanks a lot, Carolina!
Dear Carolina,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your classmates in that your mind map is appealing because of the balanced combination of several resources including the linguistic, spatial, colors and images. It is good that you provide a concept and some key words that help understanding the definition. It is important not to include concepts without any qualification because the reader will not understand. Your discussion is accurate in terms of displaying what I mainly intended to convey which was a criticism to 'la tibieza' of Li Wei of not being able to transcend the verbocentrism implicit in the word translanguaging simply because the word is so established that it is hard or counterproductive to contest it.
Drew leaves a question worthy of thought. Something along the lines whether the distinction of the two concepts matter when it comes to practicality in the language classroom? Well, at the end of the day, so many teachers do great things in their classrooms without having handle of the theoretical principles that inform their practices, or some teachers know so much theory but their teaching practices are inconsistent with those theories....