Abstract

School principals are street-level bureaucrats whose sense-making about language policies makes them de-facto policy makers. In turn, their language policy-making is mediated by their language ideologies and contexts. Using a case study methodological framework, this article explores the language ideologies of 11 New York City elementary school principals with high numbers of Emergent Bilinguals. It attempts to answer Ruiz’ call to make language ideologies clear and obvious in order to provide the level of transparency needed to enlighten the process of language policy creation and practice (Ruiz 1984 Ruiz, R. 1984. “Orientations in Language Planning.” NABE Journal 8 (2): 15–34.[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]). Analyses of the participating principals’ narratives revealed the existence of three different language ideologies: Resource Instrumental Mobility (RIM), Resource Integrative Democratic (RID), and Language as a Problem (LAP). This paper is an exploration of the RIM and RID language ideologies, which consider language as a resource, but do so for intrinsically different reasons. Thus, the findings expand on Ruiz’ (1984) Orientations in Language Planning by complicating and providing nuance to the concept of Language-as-Resource.

摘要

学校校长是街头官僚，他们对语言政策的理解使他们实际上是政策制定者。反过来，他们的语言决策是由他们的语言意识形态和语境所调解的。本文采用案例研究的方法框架，探讨了11位纽约市小学校长的大量新兴双语者的语言意识形态。它试图回答鲁伊斯的呼吁，使语言意识形态清晰明了，以提供启发语言政策制定和实践过程所需的透明度（鲁伊斯，1984年）。 Ruiz，R. 1984年。“语言规划的方向。” NABE Journal 8（2）：15 – 34。[Taylor＆Francis Online]  ，[Google Scholar]）。参与校长的叙述分析表明存在三种不同的语言意识形态：资源工具流动性（RIM），资源整合民主（RID）和语言即问题（LAP）。本文是对RIM和RID语言意识形态的探索，这些思想将语言视为一种资源，但这样做的原因本质上有所不同。因此，研究结果通过使语言概念复杂化并提供细微差别，扩大了鲁伊斯（1984）语言规划的取向。语言即资源。