「言語」の脱植民地化・地方化とアセンブレッジDecolonising, provincialising and assembling language
- Publisher:
- 社会言語学 （Sociolinguistics）
- Publication Type:
- Journal Article
- Citation:
- 社会言語学 （Sociolinguistics）, 2022, XXII, pp. 97-114
- Issue Date:
- 2022-11-30
Closed Access
| Filename | Description | Size | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Final_accepted_decolonising_otsuji.docx | Accepted version | 73.63 kB | |||
| Otsuji_frontpge.pdf | Published version | 1.21 MB |
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Closed Access
This item is closed access and not available.
In response to the paper written by Kimura (2022), who challenges a recent turn in sociolinguistics that provokes the notion of discrete and statist ‘language’, this paper closely scrutinises the epistemological, ontological and critical aspects of language. Kimura labels the newly emerged sociolinguistics, which are often understood as post–multilingualism (Wei, 2016), multilingual turn (May, 2013), translingual linguistics (Dovchin & Lee, 2019) and critical post-structuralist sociolinguistics (Garc´ıa et al., 2017), as ‘postmodern linguistics’ on the basis that they defy the modernist and statist relations between nation, language and ethnicity. The paper, however, warns that this labelling has a danger of oversimplifying these approaches as well as a risk of unnecessarily and uncritically taking on the postmodern critiques, which falls outside the points Kimura is trying to raise. By drawing on metrolingualism (Pennycook & Otsuji, 2014) — one of the main translingual approaches — this paper unpacks the underlying assumption of language by scrutinising everyday language practice when people say, for example, ‘I speak Polish’ or ‘I speak Korean’ and shows the complex relations between the epistemology (perception) and ontology (practice) of language. The paper points out that taking a translingual or metrolingual stance does not necessarily claim that language does not exist, but deeply engages with the politics of language ideologies from the geopolitical, historical, material and economic perspectives and therefore is sensitive to social struggle, change and transformation. The paper indicates rethinking of ontological and epistemological aspects of language would have methodological and theoretical implications for studies of linguistic diversity and needs to be taken seriously.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: