unity in (super)diversity”: what’s new for europe?

7/27/2019 Unity in (super)Diversity: whats new for Europe?

1/5

Unity in (super)Diversity: whats new for Europe?

Franco Zappettini

Department of Applied Linguistics and Communication,

Birkbeck College, University of London

Following the recent surge of interest in language and superdiversity this article offers some

comments on the implications of the notion of superdiversity for the European social and

normative fields and how such notion can be best applied in such fields. This article suggests

that the current normative approach of multilingualism has been based on the definition of

languages as denominational codes problematizing non-standard communicative practices and

drawing from national models. Instead, treating Europe as a superdiverse speech community

could provide a key to understanding a superdiverse and yet united European community.

F r a m i n g s u p e r d i v e r s it y

In social sciences superdiversity has been a bit of a buzzword of late. Coined by Vertovec (2006,2007) in relation to the social impact of major migratory changes in Britain, the term was soon

adopted by other disciplines including linguistics (Blommaert and Rampton, 2011). In brief, the

term superdiversity underscores the fact that more people than any previous time are

increasingly moving, coming into contact and interacting within any society as a consequence of

globalization processes and the development of technology. Of course this social variety had

been acknowledged before the notion of superdiversity emerged and it was often captured by

the multi-cultural, -ethnic,-lingual labels. Whats new about superdiversity however, it has been

suggested, is the scale and intensity of processes that are occurring reflecting on the individual

awareness that what is around us is more finely grained that we might have thought possible or

experienced in the past. One of the consequences of living in a superdiverse society is that

whilst we are more likely to engage with a much wider range of resources, patterns of social

interaction have largely lost their predictability. Among the scientific community, therefore the

realization has emerged that, in the face of the diversification of diversity (Jrgensen and


2/5


3/5

H ow t o u n d e r s t a n d s u p e r d i v e r s i ty i n t h e E u r op ea n c on t e x t

The dramatic changes framed by Vertovecs (2007) super diversity are having profound

implications for the European project whose institutional aspirations are encapsulated by the

Unity in Diversity philosophy. Although the European continent may not be the most diverse

per seand superdiversity clearly needs to be understood beyond the western world paradigm

and its Eurocentricity, contemporary Europe offers an interesting standpoint for the analysis of

the social changes brought about by the EU project and the normative approach adopted by the

institutions in relation to the linguistic diversity. European superdiversity however, is reflected in

the institutional vision of multilingualism to a very limited extent. On the one hand the EU has

ideologically rejected the rhetorical mobilisation of languages based on the national model

recognizing that all languages are equal and fostering multilingual policies that would celebratediversity. On the other hand, however through the promotion of linguistic policies based on a

selective understanding of multilingualism, the EU has contributed to a reproduction of a

hierarchy of official, working, minority regional, and immigrant languages and a reproduction of

national ideologies (see Zappettini forthcoming). In this sense multilingualism has been treated

as another denominational code albeit at supranational level. For example, the recognition of

official languages of individual member states as the official languages of the EU has reasserted

this assumption. Similarly, the mother tongue + 2 formula, which leaves curricula

implementation within national competences, has resulted in the naturalization and

marketization of English. Furthermore, the introduction of the European Charter for Regional or

Minority Languages, which is meant to protect around 60 lesser languages, leaves the

definition of what counts as regional or minority languages to individual Member States which

then have the right to choose which provisions to apply to which minorities. From this

perspective, the EUs multilingual regime remains thus a difficult balancing act that recognizes

and promotes a notion of selective multilingualism vis--vis an increasingly superdiversified

and linguistically complex European society highlighting the discrepancy between different

interpretations of Europe as a language community vs. a speech community. These tensions

have been further amplified in different fields and along different lines: for instance in the

divergent discursive construction of multilingualism at institutional and grassroots level

(Zappettini and Comanaru, 2013) in the struggle between transnationalised communities of


4/5

practice converging towards functional lingua francas and local communities committed to

linguistic ecologies.

The EUs postnational project of bringing together a community of culturally diverse citizens

may still a pursuable endeavor, but it calls for an approach to the study of normative

intervention and discourses of language ideologies and identity politics that move away from

the methodological nationalism (Wimmer and Schiller, 2002) that has characterized it so far. In

this respect we should thus take up Fanshawe and Sriskandarajah (2010) argument that, in the

context of superdiversity, a new politics of identity will have to take into account that people

cannot be put in a box anymore and rely instead on the notion that a European speech

community exists and has been interacting independently of definitions such as official

languages, minority languages and so on. This would obviously imply a move towardsconceptual and methodological tools that treat the linguistic superdiversity of/in Europe beyond

the multilingual set up based on the recognition of languages as denotational codes, a political

bravery that institutions would hardly be ready to subscribe to.

However, linguists could turn to the exploration of the European speech community without

restricting the notion of Europe to the institutional angle but rather interpreting it as a social

field available for social, political, cultural, bottom-up, top-down and in-between examinations.

In this context insights could emerge on social change in Europe through the lens of language in

its amplest inference including but not limited to discursive constructions, policies, attitudes,

practises and ethnographies and more importantly, challenging the national paradigm. In this

sense, there are opportunities for (linguistic) superdiversity to be a factor in shifting the

language-identity relation away from the national and towards the post-national envisaged by

the European project. Understanding the issues at stake in the process of change especially

from fresh methodological and theoretical perspectives can help us make sense of a

(super)diverse' and yet 'united' community of Europeans.

Re f e r en ce s


5/5

Blommaert, Jan and Ben Rampton (2011), Language and Superdiversity: A Position Paper.

Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, paper 70.

Fanshawe, Simon & Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah (2010), 'You Can't Put Me In A Box'. Super-

diversity and the end of identity politics in Britain. Institute for Public Policy Research.

Vertovec, Steven (2006), The Emergence of Super-Diversity in Britain. Centre on Migration,

Policy and Society Working Papers, 25. Oxford University.

Vertovec, S. 2007. Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies 30:1024-1054.

Jrgensen, J. and Juffermans, K. Superdiversity available online http://www.toolkit-online.eu/docs/superdiversity.html visited 28/2/2013

Silverstein, M. 2013. How Language Communities Intersect: Is superdiversity an incremental or

transformative condition? Language and Super-diversity: Explorations and interrogations June 5-

7, 2013. University of Jyvskyl, Finland.

Wimmer, A., Schiller, N. G. 2002. "Methodological nationalism and beyond: nation-state building,

migration and the social sciences." Global networks.

Zappettini, F. (forthcoming). A Badge Of Europeanness If You Like: Shaping Identity Through

The Eus Institutional Discourse On Multilingualism. Journal of Language and Politics. Accepted

15 April 2013

Zappettini, F., Comanaru, R. (2013) Bottom-Up Perspectives On Multilingual Ideologies In The Eu:

The Case Of A Transnational Ngo. Paper presented at Language and Super-diversity:

Explorations and interrogations conference June 5-7, 2013. University of Jyvskyl, Finland.

Zappettini, 2013

unity in (super)diversity”: what’s new for europe?

Documents