{"title":"Translanguaging and trans-semiotizing in English-medium classrooms: Upholding university’s policies or constructing knowledge?","authors":"Mohammad Mosiur Rahman , Guangwei Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.linged.2025.101424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Universities worldwide adopt English-medium instruction (EMI) due to the global role and status of English. However, policies advocating for EMI often overlook the importance of other languages, semiotic resources, and modalities in communication. Such oversight underscores the necessity of examining the adoption and implementation processes of both English and other languages. Building on an expanded language policy framework as well as translanguaging and trans-semiotizing perspectives, we investigated the language ideologies and classroom language practices of educators and students as micro-level responses to a private Bangladeshi university's English-only policy. To gain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon, we employed a case study design and gathered data from various sources, including semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, and stimulated recall interviews. A thematic analysis of the data revealed that both educators and students held favorable beliefs about English, the adoption of EMI, and translanguaging in classroom teaching. In their language practices, translanguaging and trans-semiotizing were an integral part of instruction for various epistemological and pedagogical reasons, and EMI was used mostly in written discourse. Thus, EMI was more of an ideological manifestation and involved languages other than English. In this light, there is a need for a policy shift from an English-only to a bi/multilingual focus in Bangladeshi higher education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47468,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics and Education","volume":"87 ","pages":"Article 101424"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistics and Education","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898589825000427","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Universities worldwide adopt English-medium instruction (EMI) due to the global role and status of English. However, policies advocating for EMI often overlook the importance of other languages, semiotic resources, and modalities in communication. Such oversight underscores the necessity of examining the adoption and implementation processes of both English and other languages. Building on an expanded language policy framework as well as translanguaging and trans-semiotizing perspectives, we investigated the language ideologies and classroom language practices of educators and students as micro-level responses to a private Bangladeshi university's English-only policy. To gain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon, we employed a case study design and gathered data from various sources, including semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, and stimulated recall interviews. A thematic analysis of the data revealed that both educators and students held favorable beliefs about English, the adoption of EMI, and translanguaging in classroom teaching. In their language practices, translanguaging and trans-semiotizing were an integral part of instruction for various epistemological and pedagogical reasons, and EMI was used mostly in written discourse. Thus, EMI was more of an ideological manifestation and involved languages other than English. In this light, there is a need for a policy shift from an English-only to a bi/multilingual focus in Bangladeshi higher education.
期刊介绍:
Linguistics and Education encourages submissions that apply theory and method from all areas of linguistics to the study of education. Areas of linguistic study include, but are not limited to: text/corpus linguistics, sociolinguistics, functional grammar, discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis, conversational analysis, linguistic anthropology/ethnography, language acquisition, language socialization, narrative studies, gesture/ sign /visual forms of communication, cognitive linguistics, literacy studies, language policy, and language ideology.