Have you ever secretly thought that people invent a term so it sounds like something new and exciting, but it’s actually no different to an existing term? Terminological confusion happens a lot when ideas become popular and people embrace them in different ways.
But I’d like to argue for a term that has been accused of this: translanguaging. The term that already exists? Code-switching.
We have had the idea of code-switching - switching between ‘codes’ or languages - for a long time, and plenty of interesting research has been conducted using this term.
There are different reasons for switching codes in education settings. In class, a teacher might be speaking in a foreign language to give students more exposure to the language, but change to a shared language to build rapport with the students or to manage the class. It can also be fun to play with language, or insert vocabulary from one language into another.
Code-switching focuses on codes; for example, the particular languages being used.
In contrast, translanguaging focuses on the process of what we do with language, or our practices. We are not concerned with particular languages, but with the people who are speaking/using the language that they know (their language resources).
Translanguaging refers to what people do with their different language resources in different contexts, or how these resources flow through/from them. This allows us to explore the way people are using language with no pejorative implications or overlay, such as how they are conforming to particular codes.
For example, consider the connotations of Spanglish or Chinglish. It’s commonly perceived as not quite right. You have a code you are using - English, for example - and then you switch to Spanish.
So the idea of codes keeps languages in different boxes, and people can be judged on their mixing of these boxes.
The idea of translanguaging aims to address the idea of deficit - this person doesn’t speak as well as this person - and privilege what people know and do, especially students.
Maybe students are unfamiliar with societal norms or prestigious codes, such as academic English. Helping them with this code is generally important so they can succeed academically. But the idea of translanguaging can help because you can start with the person and work from there. You can treat their language knowledge and experience as valuable in its own right.
For example, if I say ‘Me gustaría pedir una cita’ (I’d like to make an appointment) in Spanish when all the Spanish-speaking people around me say ‘Llamaba para pedir una cita’ (I was calling to make an appointment), I’m directly translating ‘I’d like to’ from English. It’s correct what I’m saying, but not as natural from the perspective of my Spanish friends.
If we don’t worry so much about codes, it’s easier to investigate what is happening here. A bilingual person is not monolingual in two languages. They don’t necessarily think using two ‘codes’ but rather use their language resources as best they can to make meaning in particular contexts.
As a teacher, if you think from a translanguaging rather than code-switching perspective, you're working from the students’ knowledge base as a whole.
So a useful way of thinking about the difference between the two terms in teaching and learning is this:
Code-switching: Moving between what interlocutors perceive to be different systems of meaning-making (2 different languages, for example). The focus is on the juxtaposition of codes;
Translanguaging: Drawing on different kinds of language resources to make meaning. The focus is on meaning-making and how it relates to the students’ past and present knowledge and experience.
Code-switching scholarship has done much to advance our understanding of language use. But a translanguaging offers a different perspective. It can help to focus on the students themselves and the relationship between their language practices and their learning.