Hogeschool Windesheim heeft het initiatief gelanceerd tot een landelijk Platform Meertaligheid in het Onderwijs. Het platform beoogt samen met andere hogescholen, met universiteiten en overige partners invulling te geven aan het gemeenschappelijke doel: elke thuistaal een plek te geven in het onderwijs.

Contactadres: cj.helsloot@windesheim.nl

Mondialisering bepaalt onze samenleving. We gaan grenzen over voor vakantie, werk of familie. Onze leefwereld is steeds diverser, en óók steeds meertaliger. Terecht dus dat er aandacht is voor vreemde talen in het basisonderwijs. Platform Onderwijs 2032 adviseert om vanaf groep 1 met Engels te starten, en staatssecretaris Sander Dekker roept op om Duits en Frans vroeg aan te bieden in grensstreekscholen.

Maar waarom alleen deze talen? Een derde tot de helft van de leerlingenpopulatie gebruikt thuis een andere taal, al dan niet naast het Nederlands. Zo zijn er kinderen met Surinaamse, Antilliaanse, Indonesische of Molukse wortels, en kinderen van arbeidsmigranten uit bijvoorbeeld Turkije, Marokko en meer recent, Polen of Roemenië. Er zijn kinderen van asielzoekers uit Iran, Afghanistan en Somalië, en nieuwe stromen vluchtelingen komen er aan, uit o.a. Syrië en Irak. En natuurlijk zijn er ook Nederlandse kinderen die thuis Fries of een dialect spreken. Voor al deze kinderen is meertaligheid een fact of life.

Deze vorm van meertaligheid krijgt echter in het onderwijs maar weinig ruimte en waardering. De rol van het Nederlands als voertaal staat buiten kijf, net als de focus op het versterken van de taalvaardigheid Nederlands. Bij het verwerven van het Nederlands, van het Engels of van welke taal dan ook, maakt de leerling met een ‘tweede’ taal indirect gebruik van zijn kennis. Zo doet de mens dat met alles: voortbouwen op wat je weet. Waarom mag dat niet expliciet worden benoemd als het om taal gaat?

Lang dacht men dat het kinderbrein niet meer dan één of twee talen aankon, dat het vroeg aanleren van het Engels ten koste ging van het Nederlands, en dat het gebruik van een andere thuistaal inburgering in de Nederlandse samenleving in de weg stond. Recent onderzoek laat zien dat kinderen met gemak verschillende talen naast elkaar kunnen leren en gebruiken, dat het beheersen van meer dan één taal culturele en economische verrijking betekent, én dat het cognitieve voordelen heeft. En misschien wel het belangrijkste inzicht: ruimte geven aan de eigen taal zorgt voor emotioneel evenwicht en voor een positieve houding van de leerling zelf. Wanneer eigenheid wordt toegestaan, nemen veiligheid en welbevinden toe.

Wat betekent het nu voor een leerkracht als er vier, tien of meer verschillende taalachtergronden aanwezig zijn in een klas? Hoe doe je dat, als je zelf geen Twents, Pools of Arabisch spreekt? Universiteiten, hogescholen en andere instellingen doen al jaren onderzoek naar taal en taalverwerving. Zij kunnen bijdragen aan bijscholing, begeleiding en lesmaterialen, voor alle leeftijden en sectoren. Dus, taalexperts, sla de handen ineen om leraren over de drempel te helpen. Bestuurders van universiteiten en hogescholen, geef toekomstige leerkrachten de handvatten om te werken in cultureel diverse omgevingen: een leerlijn meertaligheid in de pabo, een masteropleiding taalvergelijking en meertaligheid.

Laat elk mens zich ontwikkelen door ook zijn moedertaal, zijn thuistaal, daarbij in te mogen zetten. Een vreemde taal mag in de klas, de eigen taal helpt in de klas, de thuistaal telt in de klas!

Zwolle, 25 november 2015

Dr. Karijn Helsloot & Dr. Gerrit Jan Kootstra, Hogeschool Windesheim

Harry Frantzen, Hogeschool Windesheim Dick de Wolff, Hogeschool Utrecht
Pieter Muysken, Radboud Universiteit Guus Extra, Tilburg University
Hans Bennis, Meertens Instituut
Jacomine Nortier, Universiteit Utrecht
Rick de Graaff, Universiteit Utrecht / Hogeschool Inholland Ellen-Rose Kambel / Rutu Foundation
Ad Backus, Tilburg University
Alex Riemersma, Stenden Hogeschool, NHL Hogeschool Leeuwarden Alessandra Corda, Hogeschool van Amsterdam
Leendert-Jan Veldhuijzen, De Nieuwe Internationale School Esprit Mathi Vijgen, Hogeschool Utrecht
Hanke Drop, Hogeschool Utrecht
Leonie Cornips, Maastricht University, Meertens Instituut
Merel Keijzer, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
Jan Berenst, NHL Hogeschool Leeuwarden
Paul Leseman, Universiteit Utrecht
Joep Bakker, Radboud Universiteit
Abram de Swaan
Liesbeth Schlichting
Folkert Kuiken, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Erna van Koeven, Hogeschool Windesheim
Maaike Hajer, Hogeschool Utrecht
Anne Baker, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Jeannette Schaeffer, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Jan Doelman, Hogeschool Windesheim
Martin ’t Hart, Hogeschool Inholland
Hanneke Pot, Hogeschool Inholland
Irene van Adrighem, Hogeschool Inholland
Anneke Smits, Hogeschool Windesheim
Frederike Groothoff, leerkracht PO en UU
Sharon Unsworth, Radboud Universiteit
Aafke Hulk, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Eddie Denessen, Radboud Universiteit
Wander Lowie, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
Beppie van den Bogaerde, Universiteit van Amsterdam / Hogeschool Utrecht Everdiene Geerling, Stichting Nederlands Onderwijs in het Buitenland
Orhan Agirdag, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Janet van Hell, Pennsylvania State University, USA
Ton Dijkstra, Radboud Universiteit
Bert Meijer, Hogeschool Windesheim
Lex Stomp, Hogeschool Windesheim
Federico Gobbo, Universiteit van Amsterdam / Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca / Università degli Studi di Torino
László Marácz, Gumilyov Eurasian National University / Universiteit van Amsterdam

On November 6 and 7, Prof. Philippe van Parijs (Catholic University of Louvain / University of Oxford), author of the influent book Linguistic Justice for Europe and for the World (Oxford University Press), will be at the Faculty of Humanities at the University of Amsterdam in visit. The Amsterdam Centre for Globalisation Studies (ACGS) and the EU-funded project Mobility and Inclusion in Multilingual Europe (MIME) have organized two events, one for researchers and experts, one for the general public.

Details of the workshop for researchers and expert:

http://acgs.uva.nl/news-and-events/upcoming-events/item/global-english-mobility-and-motility-workshop.html

Details of the public lecture for the general public:

http://acgs.uva.nl/news-and-events/upcoming-events/item/philippe-van-parijs-public-lecture.html

Written by: Christopher Houtkamp

On the 11th of May, the MIME consortium in Amsterdam invited Ruud Koopmans, Professor of Sociology and Migration at the Humboldt Universität in Berlin, for a small-scale brainstorm session on the connection between language and integration of minorities. The session was particularly interesting, because Koopmans treats language in a considerably different way than most members of the MIME-consortium.  His approach becomes apparent when reading his forthcoming article ‘Does Assimilation Work? Socio-Cultural Determinants of Labour Market Participation of European Muslims’. In this study language proficiency is one of the factors used to explain labour market success of immigrants. In other words: Koopmans focusses predominantly on the instrumental value of language for success in other areas, rather than on its intrinsic and/or cultural value.

Koopmans argues in favour of the assimilation of immigrants, also from a linguistic perspective. Knowledge of the language of the host-society (e.g., German, Dutch) has a strong positive effect on labour-market success. In contrast, knowledge of the mother-tongue has either no or even a slight negative impact. It has to be noted that Koopmans’ concept of ‘assimilation’ does not necessarily imply that minorities have to forsake their own cultural identity. He envisions that immigrants should at least fully adopt the language of the host-society, which should always be their first priority. However, after having achieved this, there is no reason for them not to foster their own mother-tongue, even in education. He makes an exception where it concerns primary school children: since they more often than not only speak their mother tongue at home, the focus of the formal education system should lie exclusively on the host-society language. In fact, migrant-parents should also be encouraged to speak the host-society language at home: otherwise the children run the risk of not mastering this language at all, which will hurt their labour-market chances in the later stages of their lives.

The audience made a few remarks to Koopmans’ perspective that are worth mentioning. First of all, Koopmans’ research seems to barely account for developments of transnationalism, which can fundamentally impact the willingness and capability of migrants to assimilate in their host-societies. Furthermore, in such a transnational environment, mastery of the mother-tongue can become a bigger asset than it is now: it could facilitate the contact between ethnic peers in different EU-countries (e.g. Turks in the Netherlands and in Germany) and therefore expand the mobility-options of migrants within Europe. Secondly, language has , alongside an economic, also a strong cultural value. In the context of the EU, which prides itself for its ‘unity in diversity’, these cultural aspects might be equally as important as economic considerations.

One of the conclusions that can be drawn after the session was that both Professor Koopmans and the MIME-consortium can learn a lot from each other. Koopmans shows us that when designing a language policy we should certainly not neglect the economic implications our proposals could have. Furthermore, his research proves that assimilation still is the best route to economic success, a conclusion that should give us food for thought. On the other hand, the transnational and cultural aspects of language and integration policy are not prioritised in Koopmans’ work, and for that matter, in the work of many integration scholars. It could potentially be enriching were they to try and implement these factors in their studies. To conclude, the dialogue between Professor Koopmans and MIME Amsterdam was thought-provoking: it showed how much the consortium can benefit from an outsider’s perspective.

In the framework of the MIME project, we have organized a one-day workshop with the colleagues of the University of Leipzig (Germany) on the topic of Lingua Franca.

This is the programme:

• 12:00-12:45 Sabine Fiedler: “Lingua franca as a strategy for meeting the multilingual challenge”
• 12:45-13:30 Cyril Brosch: “On the conceptual history of the term Lingua Franca”
• lunch break
• 14:30-15:15 Federico Gobbo: “Linguae francae between communication and identity: theoretical issues”
• 15:15-16:00 Laszlo Maracz: “The notion of Lingua Franca in the MIME framework”
• 16:00-17:00 final discussion.

We will meet in Amsterdam. The exact venue is:

University of Amsterdam
P C Hoofthuis
Spuistraat 134
room 7.07 (*)

(*) Note. Take the last elevator in the corridor to reach the seventh floor.

By: Christopher Houtkamp

On 29 and 30 January , MIME-Amsterdam officially launched. To celebrate this fact, several activities were organised. On 29 January, the MIME-researchers welcomed Prof. Dr. Tom Ricento from the University of Calgary for a brainstorming session. Mr. Ricento read the research proposals of PhD candidates Nesrin El Ayadi (WP2) and Christopher Houtkamp (WP1) and engage them with constructive criticisms. Furthermore, the group discussed Ricento’s newest book, ‘Language Policy and Political Economy: English in a global context’.  Ricento expressed his concern for the rising dominance of English on a global scale, which is in particular detrimental for developing countries. English is however the most important language in our current global economic system, making it difficult to halt its expansion. For instance, many universities think about offering all their courses in English: they assume an English curriculum will attract more students and thus more money. Ricento urges everyone to critically reflect upon the role of English in society.

On 30 January, a series of activities was planned as well. In the morning, Clotilde Bonfiglioli (WP2), PhD-candidate at the Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, presented part of her research for an interested audience. Ms. Bonfiglioli’s research focusses on language policy in the periphery of Brussels, in particular towards non Dutch-speaking population. Brussels is very much a multilingual city and Brussels Capital Region is officially a bilingual region in the Belgian federal system. However, the Brussels suburbs are part of Flanders and these municipality are officially Dutch-speaking. This area is sometimes referred to as the ‘Vlaamse Rand’ (‘Flemish periphery’) to stress its inclusion in Flanders. In these suburbs, Flemish authorities put in place a rather strict pro-Dutch language policy, to the extent that government institutions refuse to accommodate non-Dutch speaking newcomers in their official communication. Ms. Bonfiglioli analyses, among other things, how this Flemish language policy affects the mental disposition of French speakers and other allophones.

In the afternoon MIME was launched formally in the presence of a wider audience in the Senate room, one of the oldest and most beautiful rooms of the University of Amsterdam. Several speakers took the floor. Professor Tom Ricento delivered a key note lecture on the complex questions one should ask when reflecting upon language policy, focusing on the Canadian case. He challenged the audience to rethink their pre-conceptions about seemingly straightforward concepts such as ‘language’ and ‘language policy’ and showed how complex they in fact are. Following Ricento’s lecture, MIME-coordinator Professor François Grin of the University of Geneva gave a general overview of the MIME-project. Subsequently three members of the UvA MIME-group, MIME vice-coordinator Dr. László Marácz (WP1), Dr. Virginie Mamadouh (WP2) and Prof. Dr. Federico Gobbo (WP3) briefly presented their research plans for the next four years. The afternoon was closed by a speech of Andy Klom, Head of the Representation of the European Commission in the Netherlands, who emphasised the importance of a good linguistic education for the European economy. Afterwards, guests and MIME researchers could discuss the MIME research agenda and multlingualism research in general over drinks.

This week is special for us. First, the MIME project will be officially launched in Amsterdam. You can see the details here. Then, a special lecture about the language practices in the Flemish periphery of Brussels will be delivered.

Both events are free, but you should register in advance because seats are limited.

A new paper, written by UvA PhD-candidate Christopher Houtkamp, has recently been published. It analyses the value of the underused concept ‘motility’ (loosely defined as ‘potential mobility’) when researching links between language (policy) and mobility. The article can be found in the ‘A’dam Multiling 2014’ section.

Abstract:

Language in the context of migration is an unexplored concept. This paper takes a first step
towards integrating language into current theories of international mobility. The current state
of migration research will be briefly outlined. Subsequently, the differences between the concepts
‘migration’ and ‘mobility’ will be discussed. Afterwards the notion of ‘motility’, which is
widely used in biology, less so in sociology, will be reviewed. Motility, loosely defined as potential
mobility, proves to be a key-concept when studying the connection between language and
migration. Lastly, some methodological challenges specifically connected to the implications
of motility for international mobility are reviewed. In this article the argument is made that
language skills and policy have a great influence on motility and thus indirectly on mobility.

Written by: Christopher Houtkamp

On the 23th of October 2014, the Humanities faculty of the University of Amsterdam had the pleasure to invite prospective PhD-candidate Sonia Cristofi. Sonia hails from Cyprus, where she studied French language and culture. After having finalised her studies at the University of Montpellier, Sonia worked as a translator for several years and taught ‘French as a second language (FLE)’ at the Alliance Française on Cyprus. However, a combination of keen academic interest and a genuine motivation to ‘save’ her mother-tongue ‘Kypriaka’ from extinction, called her back to academia. Right now, she is trying to obtain a PhD-position under supervision of prof. dr. Federico Gobbo, professor by special appointment of Interlinguistics and Esperanto.

Sonia is thus, as already hinted, writing a PhD-proposal on the role of Kypriaka on Cyprus. As most readers probably already know, Cyprus is de facto divided in two parts. Since the island’s independence in 1960 (Cyprus is a former British colony), some Greek-Cypriots expressed the desire to unify with Greece. Turkish-Cypriots however did not find the prospect of living in Greece appealing.  After a coup by the Greek military Junta in 1974, Turkey invaded the northern part of Cyprus to prevent its unification with Greece. Ever since, Cyprus has only been a unified country in name, a situation which persists until this very day. Despite being very small (approximately 1.2 million inhabitants in 2011), Cyprus can be considered a centre of geopolitical conflict.

Kypriaka (or ‘cypriot-greek’) is the dialect that is spoken by the Cypriot-Greeks, whilst the Cypriot-Turks speak Kıbrıs Türkçesi (Cypriot-Turkish). The island’s official languages are Greek (in the south) and Turkish (in the north), whilst it recognises Armenian and Cypriot-Arabic as minority languages. Cypriot-Greeks represent the vast majority of Cyprus’ population (70%). However, despite the fact that Kypriaka speakers have a numerical advantage on the island itself, their language seems under threat of extinction. We have to emphasise ‘seems’ here, since data on the active use of Kypriaka is scarce. Sonia’s research aims to change this. She wishes to conduct quantitative and qualitative field-work on Cyprus in order to investigate when and how often Cypriots speak Kypriaka. In order words, she wishes to analyse the linguistic reality of Cyprus and determine how much Greek-Cypriots value their mother-tongue. Sonia then wishes to translate her findings into practical policy solutions for the Cypriot-government, hoping that the revival of the dialect will bring the unity of Cyprus a step closer.

The audience expressed a great interest in Sonia’s research-plans and the situation on Cyprus, and proceeded to ask her questions on both topics. After a fruitful discussion, some ideas to improve her plans were suggested. For example, maybe Sonia could not only focus on the usage of Kypriaka on Cyprus itself, but also look at the linguistic reality of diaspora communities. Analysing the differences between these two groups could yield interesting results. Furthermore, she was advised to handle the sensitive geopolitical situation with great care, especially when presenting her policy solutions. Language-policy is almost always connected to power and geopolitics, especially in a country that is currently being torn apart by two bigger states. This political reality makes Cyprus a tricky, but at the same time extremely interesting case-study for linguistic scholars. It will be interesting to see how Sonia’s research will develop and what kind of impact it will have on the political situation.

The launch of our working paper series, A’dam Multiling,  will happen during the Open Access Week as an official event.

Our University organized a symposium entitled The new beginning? during the International Open Access Week (20-26 October 2014). We think that research ideas should be freely available to the general public, so we foster open access publication in our working paper series A’dam Multing.

We will launch A’dam Multiling series during that week, and some of us will participate in the symposium mentioned. We will be glad to meet you there in person!