Language Governmentality in A Global Age

• In Event: Roundtable Session 54
  In Roundtable Session: Educational Globalization’s Impact on Our Childhoods, Languages, Minds, and Morals

Abstract

There has been a great deal of work exposing the oppressive nature of language ideologies associated with the rise of nation-states (Mühäusler,1996). Some critical applied linguistics have begun to develop dynamic language ideologies in an attempt to counteract these nationalist language ideologies. García (2009) in her description of dynamic bilingualism is demonstrative of this shift in thinking. In her view dynamic bilingualism uses the fluid language practices as opposed to idealized notions of language as the basis for pedagogical strategies through a process García refers to as translanguaging.
The emergence of dynamic language ideologies offers a great deal of promise in theorizing a decolonized language education policy informed by language ideologies not complicit in the nation-state paradigm. However, recent insights from poststructuralism indicate the need for caution in embracing dynamic language ideologies emerging in opposition to nationalist language ideologies. Poststructuralists have identified the emergence of new relations of power-knowledge that they associate with the age of global neoliberalism (Deleuze, 1992). They argue that this new form of governance thrives on dynamic and ever-changing subjects and populations whose affect can constantly be modulated in the service of never-ending consumption and lifelong learning (Puar, 2009). In short, perhaps this newly emerging dynamic language ideology is also part of newly emerging relations of power-knowledge and a new form of governance.
To explore this idea, this paper will be centered around a poststructuralist reading of key policy texts produced within the global debate on language education policy (Allen, 2009). The global debate on language education policy tends to be framed around two different perspectives: (1) the economic perspective, which focuses on high quality language education as a tool for economic development and (2) the human rights perspective, which focuses on access to mother-tongue education as a fundamental human right comparable to any other human right. Two prominent organizations that reflect the economic perspective are the World Bank and the OECD. One prominent organization that represents the human rights perspective is UNESCO. In order to examine the relationship between these global entities and the shifts occurring in academia, the analysis of these documents will be read alongside the emerging literature on dynamic languaging as well as alongside recent shifts in poststructuralist social theory.
This project, through an exploration of newly emerging relations of power-knowledge, seeks to provide a word of caution to those who are advocating dynamic language ideologies. It offers the possibility of a more nuanced analysis of how these more dynamic approaches, which while holding potential in undermining nationalist language ideologies may be emerging alongside a new form of governance and a new form of colonization.
References
Allan, E. (2009). Policy discourses, gender, and education: Constructing women’s status. Routledge: New York.
Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscripts on the societies of control. October 59:3-7.
García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mülhäusler, P. (1996). Linguistic ecology: Language change and linguistic imperialism in the Pacific Rim. New York: Routledge.
Puar, J. (2009). Prognosis time: Toward a geopolitics of

Author

• Nelson Flores, University of Pennsylvania