{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018207282913165267, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.585253456221198, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Translanguaging: a pedagogical concept that went wandering

ABSTRACT The term translanguaging goes back more than a quarter-century, originating in the domain of the teaching of Welsh, but it has over the years developed a wide variety of usages. While translanguaging is claimed to have advantages over other language education models, many of its new interpretations, which take it some distance from its original pedagogical sense, are seen by some as problematic. The new conceptualizations go beyond the pedagogical practice of drawing on multiple language varieties in order to facilitate learning; they, indeed, often extend to general, overarching accounts of language deployment among multilinguals, which sometimes do not differentiate between individual language competencies. Proponents of translanguaging in its more traditional sense point to pedagogical advantages and opportunities it presents in the (language) classroom. Even in this context, however, there is debate about the appropriateness of utilizing translanguaging in, for example, minority language maintenance contexts. In this article, we explore the variety of uses of the term translanguaging and the attendant claims attached to them. Our conclusion is that the critical factor in the capacity of the term to retain coherence and intelligibility is the maintenance of constant awareness of and attention to the perspective in which it is applied.