![]() Different resources may play different roles in different interactions and exist in (hierarchic) constellations specific to those interactions or contexts. speech, signs, mouthings, gestures, images, smells, and objects in interactions studying how these different resources make meaning in specific constellations. In research practice, this means attending to the role of e.g. Using the notion of the ‘semiotic repertoire’ pushes this understanding of translingual practice as multimodal to the forefront. features of spoken/written language such as mouthing and fingerspelling) with signing. Signers’ communicative practices form a crucial case in point to study semiotic repertoires: signers habitually and aptly blend different modalities (e.g. Scholars studying signs and gestures have investigated how modalities and languages can be expressed alternately or simultaneously, such as people gesturing and speaking or signers voicing/mouthing and signing. ( Citation2017b) was to bring together signed and spoken language linguistics, multimodality studies, and gesture studies. Key to the promotion of the term ‘semiotic repertoire’ by Kusters et al. ( Citation2017b) argued that to come to a better understanding of translingual practice, we need to pay more attention to manual forms and dimensions of communication which had been broadly studied in studies on multimodality but underresearched in studies of multilingualism. (…) he lens of semiotic repertoires enables a holistic focus (addressing ideologies, histories, potential and constraints) on action that is both multilingual and multimodal. The notion ‘semiotic repertoire’ departs from the idea that languages are bounded systems (an understanding that is central to translanguaging theory) and that repertoires are merely linguistic (they are multimodal and embodied). ![]() Instead, the ‘semiotic repertoire’ was framed as a conceptual lens: ( Citation2017b) were not primarily concerned with a definition of the semiotic repertoire. When suggesting the use of the concept ‘ semiotic repertoire’ instead, Kusters et al. Busch, Citation2012 Gumperz, Citation1982) as symptomatic for (or leading to) a narrow focus on the use of linguistic codes in translingual practice. ( Citation2017b) saw the use of the term ‘ linguistic repertoire’ (e.g. In a given interaction, an image, a gesture or sound may be more salient than e.g. As researchers of multimodality have emphasised, ‘linguistic’ resources (such as words from ‘bounded’ languages) may not necessarily carry most weight in interactions. 6) defined ‘translingual practice’ as communication that ‘transcends individual languages words and involves diverse semiotic resources and ecological affordances’. For example, Canagarajah ( Citation2013, p. To be sure, a number of scholars of translanguaging have acknowledged that communication is multimodal and involves diverse resources beyond words (Canagarajah, Citation2013 Garcia & Wei, Citation2014). The concept of the ‘semiotic repertoire’ was introduced in an earlier special issue in this journal (Vol 14, Issue 3) as a specific response to research in translanguaging that has foregrounded translanguaging as fluidly blending (features of) languages and has overlooked or downplayed the role of other resources in this practice (such as gestures, objects, and images). This special issue engages with the semiotic repertoire, which is the totality of semiotic resources that people use when they communicate (such as speech, image, text, gesture, sign, gaze, facial expression, posture, objects and so on) (Kusters et al., Citation2017b). In this context, many scholars have used the term ‘repertoire’ to talk about these features as a collection of resources that people deploy in their interactions. Translanguaging theory is predicated on the notion that languages are not bounded systems, and that features of different named languages can flexibly and fluidly be used together and blended into each other (Garcia & Wei, Citation2014). The resurgent use of the concept ‘repertoire' is largely due to shifts in conceptual understandings of language use and goes paired with the expansion from concepts such as ‘bilingualism' and ‘code-switching' to concepts such as ‘translanguaging'. including both invariant forms and variables) available to members of particular communities' ( Citation1972, pp. Recent years have seen a revitalisation in the use of Gumperz and Hymes’ notion of the verbal repertoire, meaning ‘the totality of linguistic resources (i.e.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |