Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality,
and to see the links to virtual rooms.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Veronika Lajos
(Department of Cultural Anthropology, University of Miskolc, Hungary)
Csanád Bodó (Eötvös Loránd University)
Noémi Fazakas (Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Panel
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 27 July, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
This panel addresses participatory approaches in the linguistic ethnographic study of language. It discusses how practices and interpretations of participation affect the engagement and involvement of stakeholders in research and contribute to academic knowledge-production.
Long Abstract:
Participation, defined here broadly as the involvement and engagement of all interested parties, has recently gained momentum in several societal domains, including not only political decision making, cultural and mass media spaces, whether online or offline, but also academic research. In sociolinguistics, there is a well-established tradition of involving the 'researched' into the research process itself. Key aspects of participatory research, as elaborated in the social sciences, however, have rarely been discussed in the study of language. The panel draws on recent developments in the involvement and engagement of non-academic language experts into linguistic research, such as citizen sociolinguistics (Rymes 2020, Svendsen 2018), collaborative sociocultural linguistics (Bucholtz et al. 2016), Linguistic Citizenship (Stroud 2001, 2015), community-based language research (Bischoff and Jany 2018, Olko 2018) and activist applied linguistics (Cowal and Leung 2021). We invite scholars of linguistic ethnography and anthropology as well as researchers from related fields and also non-academic participants in linguistic projects to discuss ways in which practices and interpretations of participation affect the engagement and involvement of different stakeholders in the ethnographic study of language. The panel also addresses the implicit critique of the participatory approaches lacking significant contribution to theory-building and academic knowledge-production as it is mostly practice-oriented not only in its methods but also in its intended impacts.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 27 July, 2022, -Veronika Lajos (Department of Cultural Anthropology, University of Miskolc, Hungary) Judit Gáspár (Corvinus University of Budapest) Csanád Bodó (Eötvös Loránd University) Noémi Fazakas (Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania)
Paper short abstract:
In this paper we discuss the academic researcher's role in producing and maintaining social inequalities and power relations when doing research, and how these obstacles can be overcome with applying a participatory approach in the linguistic ethnography of language revitalisation.
Paper long abstract:
Although social inequalities and power relations have always been there on the horizon of the study of language, culture and society, the dilemma that the researcher is part of these relations has rarely been posed. Yet linguists derive their expertise precisely from the fact that they have a different kind of knowledge about language than those who have no linguistic training. In our presentation, we outline the relationship between the participatory approach and linguistic ethnography as one in which the linguistic 'expertise' of linguists and non-linguists can be transformed into shared knowledge, not through the persuasion of non-linguists, but through practices of collective action to produce shared knowledge. Based on ethnographic research on a language revitalisation programme, we argue that while linguistic expertise belongs to all, linguists and non-linguists alike, a kind of knowledge that reflects the social inequalities associated with differences in linguistic expertise can only be achieved by shaping it into the co-creation of knowledge through collective action. The participatory approach is seen as a form of such action
Jinming Yuan (The University of Sydney)
Paper short abstract:
How has the tourist destination negotiated its role between global multilingualism, local bilingualism, and governmental monolingualism?
Paper long abstract:
The superdiversity and complexity of the world require tourist attractions to carter for the interests of international tourists by promoting their local cultures. One effective approach to this is to create a tourist-friendly multilingualism or bilingualism environment. Some Chinese tourist attractions such as Lion Forest Garden in Suzhou, one of the World Cultural Heritage sites in China employ Chinese and English bilingual signage. The preliminary fieldwork in Lion Forest Garden shows that most public signs are in Chinese language and their English translation, but only Chinese is used on red cultural signs in this tourist attraction. Red cultural signs are government-guide signs promoting Chinese virtues, values, and red culture, which have formed a unique scenery in tourist destinations in China. Based on the data collected during the fieldwork, this paper analyses the messages in the virtues and values that the red cultural signs attempt to convey, dig up sociolinguistic values behind, and discuss how the tourist destination has negotiated its role between the global multilingualism, the local bilingualism and the governmental monolingualism.