Advertisement

Digital Literacies

  • Tony Capstick
Chapter
  • 181 Downloads

Abstract

In this chapter, I aim to link the discussion about access to and the availability of literacy in Mirpur and Hillington to the way that the participants in this study accessed linguistic resources online. As discussed earlier, in the discourse of powerful Western governments, monolingualism is often taken to be the natural state of human life (Gal 2006: 15). This, as I have demonstrated, is the case with Urdu in Pakistan and English in the UK. Further to this, Gal argues, named languages are taken to be homogenous with, as well as markers of, the essential spirit of a particular group. In Pakistan Urdu has become the symbol for Pakistani nationhood and national identity as a Muslim (Rahman 2011; Rassool 2007). In the UK, monolingual integration policies simultaneously link proficiency in English with social cohesion and undervalue the importance of heterogeneous minority languages in forging cohesion (Blackledge 2005). Rather than endorse this opposition between monolingualism and multilingualism I will employ the term linguistic repertoire as it is not limited to the competence of multilinguals or distinct ‘languages’ but rather relates to the repertoires of styles, dialects and registers of users (Kachru 1982). Here, I explore this relationship between language, power and identity in more detail. I begin with the notion that the identities available to individuals at a given moment in history are subject to change, like the ideologies that legitimise and value particular identities more than others (Blackledge and Pavlenko 2001; Pavlenko and Blackledge 2004). I discuss how language users look for new social and linguistic resources which allow them to resist identities while also assigning new meanings to the links between linguistic varieties and identities (Norton 2006). I draw from concepts set out by Heller (2007) in her critical analysis of languages in society as she suggests moving away from seeing ‘language’, ‘community’ and ‘identity’ as natural phenomena and towards an understanding of them as socially constructed. This would mean that these categories could not be attached to individuals or groups based on, for example, their ‘ethnicity’ or ‘language’. This reconceptualisation is helpful in understanding the multilingual literacy practices of Mirpuri migrants, as they speak and write using many language varieties and their ethnicities are not rooted in one single place or associated with one specific language. Moreover, Heller draws on Giddens (1984) in considering language as a set of resources that are unevenly socially distributed. This concept is employed in the analysis here to explore the specific linguistic resources that participants draw on from moment to moment in their literacy practices.

Keywords

Embed Clause Literacy Practice Language Variety Digital Literacy Linguistic Resource 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bailey, B. (2007). Heteroglossia and boundaries. In M. Heller (Ed.), Bilingualism: A social approach (pp. 257–276). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (Ed: M. Holquist, trans: C. Emerson & M. Holquist). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. M. (1994). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. In P. Morris (Ed.), The Bakhtin reader. Selected writings of Bakhtin, Medvedev and Voloshinov (pp. 110–113). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  4. Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local literacies. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barton, D., & Lee, C. (2013). Language online: Investigating digital texts and practices. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Billig, M. (2005). Laughter and ridicule: Towards a social critique of humour. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Blackledge, A. (2005). Discourse and power in a multilingual world. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blackledge, A., & Creese, A. (2010). Multilingualism. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  9. Blackledge, A., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. International Journal of Bilingualism, 5(3), 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13, 210–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charsley, K. (2005). Unhappy husbands: Masculinity and migration in transnational Pakistani marriages. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 11(1), 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gal, S. (2006). Migration, minorities and multilingualism: Language ideologies in Europe. In C. Mar-Molinero & P. Stevenson (Eds.), Language ideologies, policies and practices. Language and the future of Europe (pp. 13–27). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning and literacy. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  14. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gillen, J. (2015). Virtual spaces in literacy studies. In J. Roswell & K. Pahl (Eds), The Routledge handbook of literacy studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Heller, M. (2007). Bilingualism as ideology and practice. In M. Heller (Ed.), Bilingualism: A social approach (pp. 1–24). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kachru, B. B. (1982). The other tongue: English across cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kalman, J. (2005). Discovering literacy: Access routes to written culture for a group of women in Mexico. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education.Google Scholar
  20. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2007). Online memes, affinities and cultural production. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 199–228). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lothers, L., & Lothers, M. D. (2007). Pahari and Pothwari: A sociolinguistic survey (FLI language and culture series, Vol. 2). Peshawar: Frontier Language Institute.Google Scholar
  23. Mahboob, A. (2002). No English, no future! Language policy in Pakistan. In S. G. Obeng & B. Hartford (Eds.), Political independence with linguistic servitude (pp. 15–39). New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Mahler, S. J. (1998). Theoretical and empirical contributions toward a research agenda for transnationalism. In P. Smith & L. E. Guarnizo (Eds.), Transnationalism from Below (pp. 64–100). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Makoni, S., & Mashri, P. (2007). Critical historiography: Does language planning in Africa need a construct of language as part of its theoretical apparatus? In S. Makoni & A. Pennycook (Eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting languages (pp. 62–89). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  26. Makoni, S., & Pennycook, A. (2007). Disinventing and reconstituting languages. In S. Makoni & A. Pennycook (Eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting languages (pp. 1–41). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  27. Norton, B. (2006). Identity: Second language. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 502–507). Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pavlenko, A., & Blackledge, A. (2004). Introduction: New theoretical approaches to the study of negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. In A. Pavlenko & A. Blackledge (Eds.), Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  29. Portes, A. (2003). Conclusion: Theoretical convergences and empirical evidence in the study of immigrant transnationalism. International Migration Review, 37(3), 874–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Portes, A., Guarnizo, L. E., & Landolt, P. (1999). The study of transnationalism: Pitfalls and promises of an emergent research field. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2), 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rahman, T. (1991). Pakistani English. Islamabad: NIPS, Qaid-i-Azam University.Google Scholar
  32. Rahman, T. (2009). Linguistics in Pakistan: A survey of the contemporary situation. Retrieved from: http://www.tariqrahman.net/olddocs/language/Linguistics%20in%20Pakistan%20endnote.htm
  33. Rahman, T. (2011). From Hindi to Urdu: A Social and Political History. Karachi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rampton, B. (1991). Second language learners and in a stratified multilingual setting. Applied Linguistics, 12(3), 229–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rampton, B. (2005). Crossing: Language and ethnicity among adolescents. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. Rassool, N. (2007). Global issues in language, education and development: Perspectives from postcolonial countries. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  37. Tagg, C. (2013). Respellings in text messages. In K. Hyland (Ed.), Discourse studies reader: Essential excerpts. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  38. Thurlow, C., & Brown, A. (2003). Generation Txt? The sociolinguistics of young people’s text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online. Retrieved from: http://extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/v1/n1/a3/thurlow2002003-paper.html
  39. Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tony Capstick
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ReadingReadingUK

Personalised recommendations