Language Learning Environments

Spatial Perspectives on SLA

Phil Benson

• Verlag: Multilingual Matters
• Jahr: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781788924924
• Thema: Filología
• Thema: Psicolingüística

This book is the first in-depth examination of the application of theories of space to issues of second language learning. The author introduces the work of key thinkers on the theory of space and place and the relevance of their ideas to second language acquisition (SLA). He also outlines a new conceptual framework and set of terms for researching SLA that centre on the idea of 'language learning environments'. The book considers the spatial contexts in which language learning takes place and investigates how these spatial contexts are transformed into individualised language learning environments, as learners engage with a range of human and nonhuman, and physical and nonphysical, resources in their daily lives. Revisitinglinguistics andlanguage learning theory from a spatial perspective, the book demonstrates that the question of where people learn languages is equally as important as that of how they do so. This work is essential reading for any researcher wishing to research the role of the environment as an active player in SLA.

1 The Where of Second Language Learning

Being Italian, for me, begins and ends with the fact that I speak and write in the Italian language…. I am therefore Italian, completely and with pride. But if I could, I would descend into all languages and let myself be permeated by them all. Even the terrible Google Translate consoles me. We can be much more than we happen to be.

Ferrante, 2019: 23–24

In the 1970s, second language acquisition (SLA) researchers turned the spotlight of second language learning research away from the forms and structures of language and pointed it at the language learning process. As a consequence, we now know a great deal about both what second language learners learn and how they learn it. For some, who emphasised the importance of investigating the learning process in its social contexts, SLA did not go far enough. Following the ‘social turn’ of the 1990s and 2000s (Block, 2003), we now know much more about the who and why of language learning. However, the social context of language learning is now very often reduced to a context of person-to-person interaction. As a result, much that is of interest to SLA researchers in the space of the human and non-human world is left out of account. Using the concept of language learning environments to capture the full range of interactions between language learners and the worlds in which they lead their lives, this book aims to ground the idea of context in space in order to shine the spotlight on the where of language learning.

Grounding Context in Space

Why is it important to ground context in space? The most compelling reasons, I believe, are connected to globalisation and mobility, the range and variety of settings in which language learning now takes place and the globalisation of SLA research itself. Globalisation and second language learning now go hand in hand (Kramsch, 2014). This is most evident in the influence of population movements on second language learning since the early 1960s. International migration, education and tourism, all of which have grown exponentially over this period, have generated demands for second language learning that have been met by a rapidly growing second language teaching and learning industry in the public and private sectors. Social mobility, often associated with internal migration from rural to urban areas, is contributing much to this demand. In many parts of the world, second language learning ‘at home’ is seen as holding the potential for future mobility overseas. There are also the stretched circuits of commodity production and distribution, in which products and processes cross language barriers and take on an increasingly global character. Lastly, the globalisation of information technologies and communication media contributes to the fluidity with which knowledge and ideas circulate around the world, adding to demand for second language learning. The effects of globalisation on second language learning are thus mediated by the accelerated mobilities of people, things and information. Everyone and everything, including language itself, seem to be on the move. One of the challenges for SLA research is to understand how second language learning practices and processes intersect with these mobilities in an increasingly globalised world.

One of the effects of globalisation is a growing awareness that it is multilingualism, rather than monolingualism, that is the norm for language knowledge and use (May, 2014). The majority of the world’s population is multilingual and the major cities of the world are increasingly ‘multilingual cities’ (King & Carson, 2016). The languages spoken in multilingual cities are now counted in the hundreds, with the effect that the few ‘world languages’ of the past are now joined by a multiplicity of languages that are global in the sense that they are dispersed across the major cities of the world. The new focus on multilingualism in SLA research is leading us to look at second language learning in new ways, notably as a matter of ‘becoming multilingual’ (Ortega, 2014). It also raises questions about the boundaries between languages and the spatial dimensions of translanguaging (Canagarajah, 2018; Li, 2018). Multilingualism and translanguaging tend to be associated with spatial mobility, while monolingualism is associated with immobility. But the globalisation of second language learning also has uneven local effects, with important implications for the question of who gets to learn which languages where.

The uneven effects of globalisation on language learning are well documented, although more so in the field of sociolinguistics than in SLA (Block, 2010; Blommaert, 2010; Pennycook, 2007). The effects of second language learning on globalisation are less well understood. If second language learners around the world were to ‘down tools’, globalisation would grind to a halt. However improbable it may seem, the idea of a language learners’ ‘strike’ highlights the sense in which globalisation and second language learning are mutually dependent. Perhaps it is wrong to think of this mutual dependence in terms of influences and effects. If globalisation is a multilayered construct of relatively independent economic, political, cultural, biological and geological flows (Appadurai, 1996; Bauman, 1998; Beck, 2000), the flow of languages through second language learning could be seen as one of the less examined layers of globalisation. No matter where it takes place, second language learning is now woven into the multiple flows of globalisation and the myriad uses of space that they entail.

Along with the globalisation of the practice of second language learning comes a heightened diversity in the spaces in which language learning takes place. Interest in these spaces first focused on the language classroom (Allwright & Bailey, 1991; van Lier, 1988). Defining the classroom as ‘the gathering, for a given period of time, of two or more persons (one of whom generally assumes the role of instructor) for the purpose of language learning’, van Lier (1988: 47) highlighted the diversity within the classroom setting. Bailey (2006: 8) argued that ‘the classroom is the setting for and the object of investigation in language classroom research’. Yet, although classroom research succeeded in moving SLA out of the laboratory and into settings where language learning actually takes place, it was less successful in establishing the variety of these settings as an object of investigation. Language learning beyond the classroom has proved a more fruitful field for investigation of the spaces of language learning, evolving over the years from studies of institutional settings such as language laboratories, self-access centres and computer laboratories (Egbert & Hanson-Smith, 1999; Gardner & Miller, 1999; Little, 2015) to studies of wider offline and online worlds of second language learning and use (Benson & Reinders, 2011; Hellermann et al., 2019; Lai, 2017; Nunan & Richards, 2015; Reinders & Benson, 2017; Sockett, 2014; Toffoli, 2020). But in this area, also, more attention has been given to language learning processes than to the spaces in which they take place (Benson, 2011a).

People who achieve high degrees of second language proficiency typically learn and use languages in multiple settings over a prolonged period of time. They learn both in language classrooms and in a variety of institutional and non-institutional settings beyond the classroom. The distribution of their time and effort across these settings also changes over time. We are, thus, coming to appreciate the complexity of the where of language learning at both global and local levels, and in relation to time. In addition, because people rarely learn second languages in a single space, we need to attend to the configurations of spaces in which they learn, or the ways in which learners assemble the where of language learning in space and over time. Globally, the where of second language learning is about who gets to learn second languages in various parts of the world, which languages they learn, their learning purposes and the competencies they develop. Locally, it is about the ways in which individuals use spatially located resources for purposes of second language learning. Conventionally, individual differences in language learning relate to biography (language background and languages learned, age, gender, educational level, socioeconomic status, purpose, etc.). In the context of globalisation, the where of second language learning is now emerging as one the most important factors of difference that influence second language learning outcomes.

The globalisation of second language learning also involves the globalisation of SLA research, which is now, more than ever, an enterprise in which researchers from every corner of the world play a part. There is still a preponderance of work written by researchers from the wealthier English-speaking regions of the world in published research. Nevertheless, research increasingly reflects the diversity within second language learning itself. There is also a corresponding scepticism about the universality of research findings, as the question of where a study was conducted becomes crucial to interpretations of its wider significance. This scepticism involves a heightened sense of the importance of local context, and to speak of local context is to begin to ground context in space. There are also uncertainties surrounding this enhanced awareness of the local specificity of research findings and their practical implications. As Kramsch (2014: 296) argues, globalisation has changed the world of language learning ‘to such an extent that language teachers are no longer sure of what they are supposed to teach’. Our awareness of the diversity of spatial contexts to which theories must apply if they are to be truly universal means that many SLA researchers are abandoning the certainties of universality for more localised understandings. A reflexive awareness of the local specificity of our own teaching and learning situations contributes to an interest in the where of language learning and space as a theoretical and practical concept for SLA research. This book attempts to make sense of the theory that might underpin a better understanding of the spatial dimensions of second language learning and its potential for application in SLA research.

Contents of the Book

Chapter 2 introduces a body of work, under the heading of critical spatial theory, that has had considerable influence in geography and the social sciences since the 1980s (Cresswell, 2015; Hubbard et al., 2004; Low, 2016). This work underpins the concept of language learning environments that lies at the heart of this book. The theory at issue is critical in that it confronts what I will call an ‘objects-in-space’ view of the world; a view in which space is seen as the container of, or background to, things and events. This is a largely taken-for-granted view not only in everyday life but also in the social sciences, where we are accustomed to think of things happening ‘in’ space. Against this view, critical spatial theory adopts what I will call an ‘objects-as-space’ conception of the world, in which space consists of, rather than contains, the objects that comprise it. One of the key ideas in Chapter 2 is that ‘space matters’ (Soja, 2009), that ‘where things happen is critical to knowing how and why they happen’ (Wharf & Arias, 2009). There is a play on words in the phrase ‘space matters’; space matters not only because it is important, but also because it is material, or physical as I prefer to describe it in this book.

The literature on spatial theory is vast and my treatment of it in Chapter 2 is selective and designed to support arguments I will develop later in the book. The perspective that I adopt is often called the ‘production of space’ perspective, which views space as the product of the social relations of production of its era. This view is Marxist in origin and involves the argument that capitalism has survived into the 21st century through a series of ‘spatial fixes’. These include the production of urban space on a massive scale and the uneven development of the regions of the world (Harvey, 1982; Lefebvre, 1991). My argument adds to this view the idea that the production of language and languages is an integral aspect of the production of space on a global scale. The view of space that I adopt, however, is more postmodern than Marxist and emphasises the fragmentation, fluidity and heterogeneity of 21st-century space (Amin & Thrift, 2002; Massey, 2005). Chapter 2 also considers the alternative, humanistic ‘construction of place’ perspective, which counters the objects-in-space view with an emphasis on the human transformation of empty space into meaningful place (Tuan, 1977). I find the production of space perspective especially helpful in thinking about the relationship of language learning environments around the world to currents in the global circulation of people, goods and information. The construction of place perspective is more helpful in thinking about language learners’ construction of individualised environments from the raw materials of these wider environments.

Chapter 3 shifts the focus to the discipline of linguistics and its conception of the spatiality of language. It builds on an insight from the literature on the production of space that, although there is no empty space, space is often produced in the image of empty space. Modern linguistics, from which SLA derives its basic conception of the nature of language, has no explicit theory of the spatiality of language, of how language fits into space. But, I argue, it does work with an implicit conception of language as a self-contained, systemic object-in-space. Chapter 3 explores this view through two histories of emergence: first, the emergence of linguistics as an object in the disciplinary space of the social sciences and, second, the emergence of the idea of language and its internal systems, structures and networks. Lastly, I look at how the idea of the language system connects to a history of the physical production of languages as self-contained systems through the semiotic geometries of standardisation, grammars and dictionaries.

Chapter 4 begins the task of developing an alternative ‘objects-as-space’ view of language and SLA, by introducing two additional areas of theory: the new philosophies of object-oriented ontology (OOO) (Harman, 2018) and assemblage theory (DeLanda, 2016) and Urry’s (2007) mobilities theory. The first task is to develop what I call a spatial ontology of language, or an understanding of how language exists spatially. In writing this book, OOO and assemblage theory have been helpful in two ways. The idea of a flat ontology, in which everything is an object and exists equally as an object, has helped me think beyond the limitations of a social view of SLA. Crucially, if everything is an object, human beings and language are also objects. We need not be constrained by the idea of an opposition between human and non-human entities, or the idea that language is an exclusively human phenomenon.

Assemblage theory has helped me think through the relation of language to the physicality of space. In assemblage theory, an assemblage is a complex object that has emergent properties that make it more than a simple aggregate of its component parts (think, for example, of the relation of water to its component parts, atoms of hydrogen and oxygen). I find assemblage theory helpful in thinking about how language, a non-physical object, is present in a space that is conceptualised as physical space. My argument is that language interacts with various physical objects to form what I call ‘language-bearing assemblages’. These are, at a basic level, thought, speech and writing, and, at more complex levels, they include assemblages such as conversation and meetings, letters and notes, and technologically enhanced assemblages such as printed documents, audio and video recordings, and broadcast audio and speech. From this point of view, language is a non-physical object that can o...