THE IMPACT OF BILINGUAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT ON THE IDENTITY OF RUSSIAN-SPEAKING YOUNG PEOPLE IN LATVIA

Cover Page

Abstract


Relevance of the work dues to the fact that bilingual education in today’s multicultural world is an effective teaching model. It allows, along with the development of educational content to solve problems, associated with the formation of abilities of intercultural communication. The purpose of the research is to analyze the situation in Latvia, where bilingual approach in national minorities’ schools has been extensively implemented in recent decades. In all countries, except for Russia, the Russian language exists within another language (languages) environment. In a situation of contact between two cultural and language systems, one of which is dominating socially, Russian-speaking bilingual acts as a representative of the non-dominant system. Under the conditions of native language’s ethnic area remoteness, while in the non-dominant part of the language community, the younger generation of Russian bilinguals partly lose language norms, competence, and a sense of cultural and language identity.


About the authors

V V Kalinina

Liepaja University

Author for correspondence.
Email: valentina.kalinina@liepu.lv
14 Liela st., Liepaja, LV 3401, Latvia

Kalinina Valentina Vladimirovna is a Doctor in Pedagogy, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Liepaja University (Republic of Latvia).

References

  1. Cittautiešu jauniešu integrācija Latvijas sabiedrībā izglītības reformas kontekstāх. Baltijas Sociālo Zinātņu institūts. 2014. URL: http://www.biss.soc.lv/downloads/resources/minoritates/ (Date: 17.05.2016).
  2. Shherba L.V. K voprosu o dvujazychii [On Bilingualism]. L.V. Shherba. Jazykovaja sistema i rechevaja dejatel’nost’. L.: Nauka, 1974.
  3. Pozdnjakova T.Ju. Russkojazychie i problemy russkojazychnoj identifikacii bilingvov [Russianlanguaging and the Problem of Russian-Language Identification of Bilinguals]. URL: http://www. bilingual-online.net (Data obrashhenija: 15.10.2015).
  4. Guilherme M. and Dietz G. Difference in diversity: multiple perspectives on multicultural, intercultural, and transcultural conceptual complexities. Journal of Multicultural Discourses. 2015. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 1—21.
  5. Canagarajah S. Multilingual writers and the academic community: towards a critical relationship. Journal of English for AcademicPurposes. 2002. No. 1. P. 29—44.
  6. Lee Jerry Won. Transnational linguistic landscapes and the transgression of metadiscursive regimes of language. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies. 2014. Vol. 11. № 1. P. 50—74.
  7. García O. Countering the dual: Transglossia, dynamic bilingualism and translanguaging in education. Rubdi, R., Alsagoff, L. (eds.) The global-local interface and hybridity: Exploring language and identity. Bristol, Buffalo and Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 2014. P. 100—118.
  8. Canagarajah S. Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review. 2011. Vol. 2. No. 1. P. 1—28.

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 647

PDF (Russian) - 204

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2017 Kalinina V.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies