促进还是削弱包容性?瑞典高等教育机构作为工作场所的语言政策

Hyeseung Jeong, Stephanie Lindemann
{"title":"促进还是削弱包容性?瑞典高等教育机构作为工作场所的语言政策","authors":"Hyeseung Jeong, Stephanie Lindemann","doi":"10.1515/multi-2023-0077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research has suggested that Swedish higher education institutions’ (HEIs’) language policies may exclude some academic staff from work-related activities due to (dual) monolingual ideologies requiring one language at a time. This study, based on the analysis of twenty-one language policy texts, investigates HEIs’ policies using a lens of inclusion at workplaces with linguistic diversity, drawing on concepts from diversity management and language policy for democracy of inclusion. All documents examined began with statements of HEIs’ values relevant to the policies. Inclusion was seldom explicitly emphasized, although policies suggested ways to facilitate it. We argue that some of the approaches – namely, taking a top-down monolinguistic approach to language choice, requiring staff to be highly proficient in both Swedish and English, and offering unspecified language support – reinforce language-based in-groups and out-groups, likely compromising rather than facilitating inclusion. Another approach, emphasizing individuals’ rights to choose what language they use, facilitates inclusion only if support is provided for everyone’s understanding. Providing immediate language support and encouraging bottom-up, flexible language choice were less common approaches but seem particularly likely to facilitate inclusion. Our analysis suggests that policies prioritizing successful communication, not specific languages, facilitate inclusion and help employees develop job-related language and intercultural communicative competence.","PeriodicalId":501468,"journal":{"name":"Multilingua","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facilitating or compromising inclusion? Language policies at Swedish higher education institutions as workplaces\",\"authors\":\"Hyeseung Jeong, Stephanie Lindemann\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/multi-2023-0077\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research has suggested that Swedish higher education institutions’ (HEIs’) language policies may exclude some academic staff from work-related activities due to (dual) monolingual ideologies requiring one language at a time. This study, based on the analysis of twenty-one language policy texts, investigates HEIs’ policies using a lens of inclusion at workplaces with linguistic diversity, drawing on concepts from diversity management and language policy for democracy of inclusion. All documents examined began with statements of HEIs’ values relevant to the policies. Inclusion was seldom explicitly emphasized, although policies suggested ways to facilitate it. We argue that some of the approaches – namely, taking a top-down monolinguistic approach to language choice, requiring staff to be highly proficient in both Swedish and English, and offering unspecified language support – reinforce language-based in-groups and out-groups, likely compromising rather than facilitating inclusion. Another approach, emphasizing individuals’ rights to choose what language they use, facilitates inclusion only if support is provided for everyone’s understanding. Providing immediate language support and encouraging bottom-up, flexible language choice were less common approaches but seem particularly likely to facilitate inclusion. Our analysis suggests that policies prioritizing successful communication, not specific languages, facilitate inclusion and help employees develop job-related language and intercultural communicative competence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multilingua\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multilingua\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2023-0077\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multilingua","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2023-0077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究表明,瑞典高等教育机构(HEIs)的语言政策可能会将一些学术人员排除在与工作相关的活动之外,因为(双重)单语意识形态要求一次只使用一种语言。本研究以对 21 份语言政策文本的分析为基础,从语言多样性工作场所的包容性角度出发,借鉴多样性管理和语言政策的民主包容性概念,对高等院校的政策进行了调查。所研究的所有文件都以阐述高等院校与政策相关的价值观开始。尽管政策提出了促进包容的方法,但很少明确强调包容。我们认为,其中一些方法--即对语言选择采取自上而下的单一语言方法,要求教职员工高度精通瑞典语和英语,以及提供不明确的语言支持--强化了基于语言的内部群体和外部群体,可能会损害而不是促进全纳。另一种方法强调个人有权选择自己使用的语言,只有在为每个人的理解提供支持的情况下,才能促进全纳。提供即时的语言支持和鼓励自下而上的灵活语言选择是不太常见的方法,但似乎特别有可能促进全纳。我们的分析表明,优先考虑成功沟通而非特定语言的政策有利于促进全纳,并帮助员工发展与工作相关的语言和跨文化交际能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Facilitating or compromising inclusion? Language policies at Swedish higher education institutions as workplaces
Research has suggested that Swedish higher education institutions’ (HEIs’) language policies may exclude some academic staff from work-related activities due to (dual) monolingual ideologies requiring one language at a time. This study, based on the analysis of twenty-one language policy texts, investigates HEIs’ policies using a lens of inclusion at workplaces with linguistic diversity, drawing on concepts from diversity management and language policy for democracy of inclusion. All documents examined began with statements of HEIs’ values relevant to the policies. Inclusion was seldom explicitly emphasized, although policies suggested ways to facilitate it. We argue that some of the approaches – namely, taking a top-down monolinguistic approach to language choice, requiring staff to be highly proficient in both Swedish and English, and offering unspecified language support – reinforce language-based in-groups and out-groups, likely compromising rather than facilitating inclusion. Another approach, emphasizing individuals’ rights to choose what language they use, facilitates inclusion only if support is provided for everyone’s understanding. Providing immediate language support and encouraging bottom-up, flexible language choice were less common approaches but seem particularly likely to facilitate inclusion. Our analysis suggests that policies prioritizing successful communication, not specific languages, facilitate inclusion and help employees develop job-related language and intercultural communicative competence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信