Page 214 - Ana Kozina and Nora Wiium, eds. ▪︎ Positive Youth Development in Contexts. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2021. Digital Library, Dissertationes (Scientific Monographs), 42.
P. 214
positive youth development in contexts
presence of several languages in a given geographical area, regardless of those
who speak them. In other words, the presence of two or more languages in
an area does not necessarily imply that people in that area can use several
of them; some use only one” (Beacco et al., 2016, p. 20, emphases are ours).
In contrast, plurilingualism or plurilingual competence is defined as “the
ability to use a plural repertoire of linguistic and cultural resources to meet
communication needs or interact with people from other backgrounds and
contexts, and enrich that repertoire while doing so” (Beacco et al., 2016, p.
20, emphases are ours). The notion of plurilingual repertoire centres sole-
ly around language use and places the issue of language proficiency in the
background. It consists of “resources which individual learners have ac-
quired in all the languages they know or have learned, and which also re-
late to the cultures associated with those languages (languages of schooling,
regional/minority and migration languages, modern or classical languag-
es)” (ibid., emphases are ours). Such a perspective is essential because it ac-
knowledges the value of developing an individual’s plurilingual repertoire
and does not focus solely on learning a specific language as the main factor
in enabling communication. A plurilingual perspective supports the use of
an individual’s idiolect in institutional settings, where a particular domi-
nant language(s) typically prevails.
Definitions of multilingualism and plurilingualism often reveal an
overlap. When an individual’s knowledge and ability to master (three or
more) different languages (as opposed to monolingualism and bilingual-
ism) are characterised in the scholarly literature published in English, they
are semantically equal, except that ‘multilingualism’ is in this sense used
especially in the American environment (e.g., Garcia, 2009), while ‘pluri-
lingualism’ emerged largely from linguistic and intercultural conceptual-
isations proposed by the Council of Europe and the European Centre for
Modern Languages (ECML) established at the Council of Europe (e.g.,
Coste et al., 2009). In particular, French linguists strictly distinguish mul-
tilingualism as the coexistence of several languages in society from pluri-
lingualism, which puts the individual at the forefront and relates to his/
her life experiences with different languages a nd cultures (Grommes & Hu,
2014; Chen & Helot, 2018).
Having radically changed how language learning and teaching prac-
tices have traditionally been conceived, another current perspective in
214
presence of several languages in a given geographical area, regardless of those
who speak them. In other words, the presence of two or more languages in
an area does not necessarily imply that people in that area can use several
of them; some use only one” (Beacco et al., 2016, p. 20, emphases are ours).
In contrast, plurilingualism or plurilingual competence is defined as “the
ability to use a plural repertoire of linguistic and cultural resources to meet
communication needs or interact with people from other backgrounds and
contexts, and enrich that repertoire while doing so” (Beacco et al., 2016, p.
20, emphases are ours). The notion of plurilingual repertoire centres sole-
ly around language use and places the issue of language proficiency in the
background. It consists of “resources which individual learners have ac-
quired in all the languages they know or have learned, and which also re-
late to the cultures associated with those languages (languages of schooling,
regional/minority and migration languages, modern or classical languag-
es)” (ibid., emphases are ours). Such a perspective is essential because it ac-
knowledges the value of developing an individual’s plurilingual repertoire
and does not focus solely on learning a specific language as the main factor
in enabling communication. A plurilingual perspective supports the use of
an individual’s idiolect in institutional settings, where a particular domi-
nant language(s) typically prevails.
Definitions of multilingualism and plurilingualism often reveal an
overlap. When an individual’s knowledge and ability to master (three or
more) different languages (as opposed to monolingualism and bilingual-
ism) are characterised in the scholarly literature published in English, they
are semantically equal, except that ‘multilingualism’ is in this sense used
especially in the American environment (e.g., Garcia, 2009), while ‘pluri-
lingualism’ emerged largely from linguistic and intercultural conceptual-
isations proposed by the Council of Europe and the European Centre for
Modern Languages (ECML) established at the Council of Europe (e.g.,
Coste et al., 2009). In particular, French linguists strictly distinguish mul-
tilingualism as the coexistence of several languages in society from pluri-
lingualism, which puts the individual at the forefront and relates to his/
her life experiences with different languages a nd cultures (Grommes & Hu,
2014; Chen & Helot, 2018).
Having radically changed how language learning and teaching prac-
tices have traditionally been conceived, another current perspective in
214
