Jordan argues that Li Wei’s (2018) translanguaging fails as a theory: vague criteria, no operationalised constructs, a relativist epistemology at odds with the scientific standards it claims, and unoriginal ‘Translanguaging Space’ and ‘Instinct’ ideas.
Criteria for a good theory (Jordan)
Explanatory power, testability, clarity, coherence, consistency, economy, breadth, usefulness. Constructs must be defined, and the problem the theory solves must be stated.
Sources
Li Wei (2018) Applied Linguistics 39(1); Fodor (1975, 1983); Popper (1972); Gregg (1993, 1996); N. Ellis (2002); Jordan (2004) Theory Construction in SLA; Phillipson’s monolingual, native-speaker and subtractive fallacies.
Counter-arguments (comments)
Kevin Gregg corrected Jordan’s account of Fodor (accepted). Others argue named languages can’t be dropped (Mura) and that teachers’ power to “transform structures” is overstated (Nick).
Key distinction (Claude)
Critiquing translanguaging as a theory of language doesn’t touch translanguaging as a pedagogy. Planned L1 use can work (see Planned translanguaging improved expository reading (MultiEd)) whatever its theoretical status. Keep the two levels apart in DELTA essays.
Connections
Translation done well - four L1 activities · Topic - SLA Theories Map