ABSTRACT

Since its inception in the 1990s Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has transformed from an initiative to improve communicative competence in foreign languages into a complex language-aware construct in which translanguaging and curriculum integration are identifiable pedagogical practices. This shift of paradigm in its conceptualisation has run parallel to the inclusion of multilingual practices in education, and it has been influenced by the so-called multilingual turn. However, despite the conceptualisation of CLIL becoming more complex, and translanguaging making an interesting case for research in multilingual and CLIL scenarios, there is still a dearth of studies dealing with translingual practices in different contexts. This article reports the results of an exploratory qualitative study investigating CLIL teachers’ perceptions on the pedagogical use of translanguaging and the impact of those perceptions on their teaching practices in different trilingual schools in Kazakhstan. Findings (1) showed that teachers’ stance on translanguaging is rather ambiguous; and (2) led us to identify a set of teaching practices related to how teachers make use of translanguaging: exclusive use of the target language as an ideal (end-goal); translanguaging as a way of scaffolding content; translanguaging as a transitional practice (temporary fix) and code-switching; and translanguaging as a way to counter teachers’ own language proficiency limits.

摘要

自 20 世纪 90 年代诞生以来，内容和语言整合学习 (CLIL) 已从一项旨在提高外语交际能力的举措转变为一种复杂的语言意识结构，其中跨语言和课程整合是可识别的教学实践。这种概念化范式的转变与教育中纳入多语言实践并行，并且受到所谓的多语言转向的影响。然而，尽管 CLIL 的概念变得更加复杂，并且跨语言为多语言和 CLIL 场景的研究提供了有趣的案例，但仍然缺乏涉及不同背景下的跨语言实践的研究。本文报告了一项探索性定性研究的结果，该研究调查了 CLIL 教师对跨语言教学使用的看法，以及这些看法对其在哈萨克斯坦不同三语学校的教学实践的影响。调查结果（1）显示教师对跨语言的态度相当模糊；(2) 引导我们确定了一套与教师如何利用跨语言相关的教学实践：专门使用目标语言作为理想（最终目标）；跨语言作为内容支架的一种方式；跨语言作为过渡实践（临时修复）和语码转换；跨语言作为应对教师自身语言能力限制的一种方式。