The multi/translingual turn in sociolinguistics has highlighted a number of ideological entanglements of foundational concepts, most significantly the way that the notion of ‘named languages’ as bordered entities is intertwined with ideologies of nation and race. In this article, I consider what the conceptual place for linguistic borders is within a ‘trans’ framework of language and propose a focus on bordering, social actions in which indexical meanings at different scales are mobilized to exert control over discursive space by erecting boundaries within or around it. I draw on data from a Facebook group for non-local teachers of English in Thailand, examining how bordering served interests of hegemonic power when linguistic borders were policed with reference to ideologies of nation, as well as how it enabled counter-hegemonic resistance when borders were erected to separate teachers of colour from the intense discursive struggle in the group.

Inspired by Jan Blommaert’s approaches to linguistic landscaping and his studies of linguistic mobility, this article traces the changing meanings of multilingualism and monolingualism in a world fractured by uneven vectors of globalization and super-diversity. Drawing on such examples as Polish anti-racist billboards, the commercial, transnational space of the mall, or translation policies in the European Union, it is possible to see the paradoxical effects of neoliberal transformations on linguistic diversity, with the hegemony of English on the one hand, and the revival of ethno-linguistic particularity on the other. Alison Phipp’s theories of multilingualism from above and from below, as well as Yaseem Noorani’s concept of “soft” multilingualism are used to make further differentiations between assertive nationalist monolingualism from below and aggressive global monolingualism from above. These different kinds of multilingualism and monolingualism, produced at intersections of ...

Limits and edges of human experience, power, and control have been expressed in language from the time of earliest writing, and likely before then in the spoken words of ordering and bordering space and territory among people. Our brief discussion of the language of borders is not a comprehensive examination of the topic, but an invitation to evaluate how we speak and write about borders that are increasingly a part of our world. The This chapter conveys our view of components and processes which help to understand how language of borders emerged, where border vocabularies are headed, and why this matters as we attempt to comprehend how to accommodate global diversity and population in a finite, changing global environment. To accomplish this, we explore the imaginary of border conceptions and social construction of border words, address the expanding border lexicon, examine the expression of meaning of borders, and assess the efficacy of the language of borders in a world at once more bounded and more " " borderless ". Keywords Border imaginaries, lexicon, and meaning · Speaking and writing borders · Binaries and parallels · Walls and barriers Limits and edges of human experience, power, and control have been expressed in language from the time of earliest writing and likely before then in the spoken words of ordering and bordering space and territory among people. In retrospect, we can identify milestones in the development of the language of borders. Some of these moments are documented, like the " birth of territory " in the Treaty of Westphalia, when boundaries were enshrined in international law (Elden 2013). Yet many of the turning points, epiphanies, and realizations in the language of borders remain unexplored and understood only partially. This concerns, for example, the legacy of the American and French revolutions on border language. Also significant is the turn from dynastic rule and related conceptions of sovereignty to notions of popular sovereignty and the language of borders as frames of self-governing political communities.

Luís Mendes and Gillian Moreira are part of a new politicised movement of language teaching. In this field of education, there is a running debate about how language teaching should react to globalisation and the historical perspectives of colonialism. Many agree this lively discussion is a good thing but the arguments are often crudely simplified, especially in the case of English language teaching. On the one hand we are asked to consider the plundering promoters of English. With their veiled motives of neo-imperial greed, they are busy thinning out the biodiversity of the world's languages by raising the cash crop of text books and pedagogies known as ELT. These professionals, say their critics, are all of a kind: they are invariably white Anglo-Saxons and are either shameless or guilt-ridden oppressors, trading the commodity of English at the price of cultural subjugation. In the opposing corner stands another protagonist: one who denies charges of cultural imperialism by an appeal to the marketplace. If we listen to the customer, goes the argument, we find that international students want international English, a tool stripped of any cultural elements which might impede communication. You don't need to know about what an 'Englishman' has for breakfast in order do business across Asia. For them, a uniform global 'youth' is united by a common aspirational culture and seeks a neutral communication tool to further its educational and professional ambitions. Mendes and Moreira deepen this debate by claiming that culture is more than kings and queens or an optional extra. They argue that culture lies at the heart of a revolution in the classroom, one that recognises that using another language to communicate across cultures can no longer be seen as a simple transaction which leaves both parties unchanged. The multiple channels through which we can choose to communicate, and the crossing and recrossing of borders due to migration and travel, create new educational possibilities and responsibilities. These are no longer hypothetical choices; they are now unavoidable. Of course, linguistic communication is still used to exchange information for a purpose but it is increasingly more likely be a personal challenge: some of those borders crossed will be within ourselves as we confront values different from our own. The two writers, whose research we feature here, see language learning as a key to self-understanding. For them, we enter a dramatic encounter with otherness, and thereby can see our own values in a new light, relative to the values held by those from different cultures. This isn't a matter of just acquiring facts, but reflecting on our attitudes and sometimes deciding to change. We no longer see our identities as fixed but recognise that the self is a fluid entity, being formed and reformed by cultural cross-currents. We operate in the 'space in-between' or the 'third space' between cultures. The language classroom is particularly rich in opportunities for developing and exploring these special spaces which question rather than reinforce borders. Mendes and Moreira are researching this with their communities of teachers. The political terms of this debate have shifted from being a critique of colonial ideology to examining the extent to which we can use education to increase respect for the ecology of cultures, combat racism, and become 'critical citizens'. Fellow researchers Alred, Byram and Fleming, see a time when 'frontiers become less barriers and prohibitions and more gateways and invitations.' (Intercultural experience and education, 2002). Everyday life is full of these 'gateways and invitations'. One way of deepening our awareness of them is to observe how others negotiate them and grasp intercultural difference. Testimonies of ''real' intercultural living' draw us into the 'third spaces' created and employed by others. The fascinating case-study that follows, provided by Mendes and Moreira, combines human interest and intercultural insight in its explorations of the encounters and experiences of a couple, named P and B: Case Study We studied an example of the personal narratives of two people who have come together from two completely different worlds.

The co-editors of this book state that "The This book is an exploration of the ways in which centre-periphery dynamics shape multilingualism. This exploration focuses on peripheral sites, which are defined as such by relationship (be it geographic, political, economic, etc.) to some perceived centre. Viewing multilingualism through the lens of centre-periphery dynamics helps to bring forth the language ideological tensions which are evident in issues of language boundary-making, language ownership, commodification, and authenticity. It also highlights the ways in which speakers seek novel solutions in adapting their linguistic resources to new situations and developing innovative and creative language practices."