Chap e 7
Mul ilingualism and iden i y
cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se
İnci Di im
Uni e si ä Wien
This chap e inqui ies in o he ela ionship be ween mul ilingualism and iden i y
cons uc ion wi hin pedagogical con ex s, pa icula ly in he domain o Ge man as
a second language. I aces he e olu ion o he concep o linguis ic iden i y in edu-
ca ional discou se, highligh ing i s oo s in mig a ion s udies and mul icul u alism
deba es o he 1990s. I c i iques he pa e nalis ic a gumen s ha o en accompany
hese discussions and unde sco es he signi ican impac educa ional policies and
p ac ices ha e on s uden s’ sel -concep ion and socie al in eg a ion. Using subjec-
i iza ional pe spec i es, and analysing a ecen Eu opean Commission epo , he
ex sc u inizes he p oblema ic implica ions o associa ing language wi h iden i y,
especially in he con ex o powe dynamics and socie al a ibu ions.
1 In oduc ion
Iden i y is a ca ego y equen ly e e ed o in pedagogical discou se as well as in
he ield o Ge man as a second language. When, why and how his ca ego y was
in oduced is no al oge he clea . Possibly, i happened pa allel o o in e wo en
wi h he de elopmen o he (Ge man) discou se on mig a ion, especially ha o
he 1990s. In hose yea s, in educa ional mig a ion esea ch, bu also in sociology,
an in ense deba e abou models o coexis ence in he mig a ion socie y s a ed.
In con as o assimila i e app oaches, ideas o a mul icul u al socie y we e de-
eloped, in he cen e o which was he “a i ma ion o he di e si y o cul u al
ways o li e and iden i ies” (Cas o Va ela & Meche il 2010: 50 ., ansl.: İD). Cas-
o Va ela & Meche il (2010) summa ize he discussion in he ollowing way: “I
İnci Di im. 2025. Mul ilingualism and iden i y cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se.
In A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese
(eds.), The cons uc ion o mul ilinguals as O he s: Do we p ac ice wha we p each?,
135–151. Be lin: Language Science P ess. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17132451
İnci Di im
assimila ionism is conce ned wi h he dissolu ion o di e ence in a model ha a -
i ms he p imacy o he nonimmig an way o li e, mul icul u alism ad oca es a
di e en pe spec i e, namely he ecogni ion o cul u al iden i ies, including es-
pecially hose o immig an mino i ies” ( ansl.: İD). Language was also quickly
iden i ied as a cen al ea u e o di e en cul u al ways o li e, mos p obably
because i is less abs ac han cul u e – i cons i u es a isible and audible di-
e si y.1This concep o mul icul u alism included he sugges ion o cul i a ing
so-called mig an languages. The a gumen was ha he languages o o igin o
hose iden i ied as mig an s2should be aken in o accoun because o hei im-
po ance o he iden i y o hese people. This some imes pa e nalis ic a gumen
was quickly aken up in pedagogical con ex s, such as in he ield o Ge man
as a second language. In his ield, he e was and s ill is an in e es no only in
eaching Ge man, bu in languages in gene al, in mig a ion, he de elopmen o
he socie y, and abo e all in he people o he socie y (see also Chp. 6). Th ough
hei di ec con ac wi h he lea ne s, eache s o Ge man as a second language
also became and s ill a e expe s on mig a ion issues, no leas because his a ea
is s ongly in e wo en wi h mig a ion policies and educa ional policies. Thus,
i is in he ield o Ge man as a second language whe e he ‘iden i y a gumen ’
de eloped, i.e. he idea ha o igin and hus languages o o igin a e cen ally
impo an and wo hy o p o ec ion. The a gumen con inues o be used in edu-
ca ional policy as well as in academic con ex s. An example o a policy con ex
is he posi ion pape o he In eg a ion Council o he Ge man ede al s a e o
No h Rhine-Wes phalia, whe e i says: “The app ecia ion o a pe son’s language
o o igin is a he same ime he app ecia ion o a pe son’s iden i y – his applies
in a e y special way o child en and adolescen s” (Landesin eg a ions a NRW
2022, ansl.: İD). Wha ideas lie behind hese a gumen s and e e ences? Wha
can i mean o people who a e conside ed o ha e a mig a ion backg ound, o
be associa ed wi h hese ideas? In his chap e , I will adop a subjec i iza ional
pe spec i e. The subjec i iza ional app oach encou ages hinking abou back-
g ounds and a ibu ions ha imply a connec ion be ween language and iden i y
1Religion was inc easingly ega ded as ano he cha ac e is ic o cul u e (Donlic & Yildiz 2024).
This domain is no add essed in his a icle. On he connec ion be ween he ca ego ies o
language, ace and eligion, see Thoma 2022, Rühlmann 2023.
2In he nine ies, he e m “mig an ” la gely eplaced he e m “ o eigne ”, which was pe cei ed
as acis . La e , in he cou se o he g owing poli ical ecogni ion o mig a ion as a social ac in
Ge many, he e m “mig a ion backg ound” (Pe chinig & T oge 2011 in Knappik & Meche il
2018:169) eme ged. Howe e , he e m was subsequen ly s ongly c i icised, pa ly due o i s
imp ecision and exclusiona y na u e (ibid.). In his a icle, ollowing he c i icism, his e m is
only used when necessa y and in a dis anced manne .
136
7 Mul ilingualism and iden i y cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se
(Bjegač 2020; Poki sch 2022; Rühlmann 2023). In he ollowing, he subjec i iza-
ional implica ions ha he claim o he uni y o language o o igin wi h iden i y
can ha e, will be p esen ed and discussed in de ail.3
2 Iden i y, language and cul u aliza ion/lingualiza ion
In e e yday con ex s, as well as in educa ional and didac ic models o dealing
wi h bilingualism and mul ilingualism, ideas o iden i y a e o en assumed in
which a s able iden i y, ied o a ce ain o igin o language, o ms he cen e o
he pe sonali y. Acco ding o hese concep ions, in he acquisi ion o a second
language, he acquisi ion o knowledge ce ainly akes place, bu he o ma ion
o iden i y con inues o ely on e e ence back o a speake ’s o igin and hei
language o o igin. This no ion o o igin as he ac o de e mining a pe son’s
iden i y p esumably goes back o E ikson’s heo y o he de elopmen o iden-
i y in a so-called li e cycle: “‘Iden i y’ hus exp esses a ecip ocal ela ionship
inso a as i encompasses bo h a pe manen being-same-sel and a pe manen
pa icipa ion in ce ain g oup-speci ic ai s” (E ikson 1989: 124; s. also E ikson
1968, 1982). Iden i y in hese concep ions is hus pe cei ed o as a ai ha is
pe manen ly inhe en in people and pe mea es he cou se o li e. I is assumed
ha he e is such a hing as a heal hy de elopmen o iden i y, which has he
s eng h o e e back o onesel again and again in he c ises o li e, and om
which one gains he s eng h o con inue o exis wi h digni y. Iden i y, in his
heo e ical o ien a ion, is mo e o less gi en om bi h, so ha he e is a na u al
connec ion o o igin, which includes belonging o a conc e e p imo dial g oup.
Such a eleological iew o iden i y is also e iden in app oaches o mul ilingual-
ism which claim ha cul u al and linguis ic (pa ial) iden i ies need o be os e ed
so ha hose os e ed can a i e a a balanced de elopmen o hei o al pe son-
ali y. In highe educa ion, one equen ly inds he a gumen in s uden pape s
ha lea ne s’ mo he ongues ha e o be in eg a ed in o he class oom so ha
he de elopmen o hei iden i y can p oceed in a heal hy way.
E en a quick sea ch on he In e ne will yield a la ge numbe o a icles om
di e en pedagogical app oaches ha suppo his app oach. An example is he
web page “E ziehungskuns ” (“A o Educa ion”) on Waldo educa ion: “Thus,
no only he second language and i s cul i a ion has a undamen al impo ance
o he o e all de elopmen o child en om language mino i ies, bu also he
3This a icle con ains e ised and upda ed passages om he publica ion Di im & Heinemann
2016. I am g a e ul o he edi o s and o he anonymous e iewe s o help ul sugges ions.
137
İnci Di im
cul i a ion o he i s language. Many membe s o he hi d gene a ion o im-
mig an s know he home coun ies o hei pa en s and g andpa en s only om
aca ion, and hey o en g ow up wi h wo languages wi hou being able o iden-
i y wi h ei he o hem. Accommoda ion o he ex e nal ways o li e, o he social
habi s and o he legal no ms o he language majo i y should he e o e no be
unde s ood as assimila ion. The ounda ion o a heal hy pe sonali y de elopmen
can only lie in he ha mony be ween one’s own cul u al iden i y and he app e-
cia ion and openness owa ds o he cul u es – and no in a cul u al up oo ing”
(Pe azzo e al. 2012,1, ansl.: İD).
Undoub edly, hese a gumen s a e based on a desi e o con ibu e o he well-
being o he pupils in ol ed. The e is no hing w ong wi h making oom o lan-
guages ha play almos no ole in he monolingual (Ge man-speaking) educa ion
sys em, o add ess and de elop languages ha a e impo an o pupils, which
hey speak in such p i a e con ex s as in he amily, and o enable educa ion in
hese languages. Howe e , i such e o s a e no e lec ed ca e ully, hey can
ha e a numbe o unin ended consequences, in pa icula i he symbolic mean-
ing o language is made cen al o an iden i y a gumen in an o e ly p esc ip i e
way. This has aken place, and con inues o ake place, in a e y simila way in
he discussion o cul u al iden i y, and i has been c i icized on a numbe o occa-
sions (Tajmel 2013, Döll e al. 2015, Al maye 2023). Some o he possible e ec s
o a igid de ini ion o iden i y can be summa ized by e e ing o Paul Meche il’s
discussion o he ca ego y o “cul u al iden i y” (Meche il 2003):
When complex social p ocesses o human coexis ence a e educed o he ca -
ego y o cul u e, a “cul u aliza ion” akes place. People a e hen no longe pe -
cei ed in hei dis inc i eness, bu ins ead, hei p esumed cul u al a ilia ion
is used as a gene al explana o y pa e n. The same applies when he complex
p ocess o de eloping a sel -unde s anding is educed o a language o o igin.
In he app oach o Niku Do os ka , his educ ion esembles “cul u aliza ion”,
and he calles i “lingualiza ion” (Do os ka 2014: 66). Re e ing o na ional and
sup ana ional EU language discou ses, Do os ka unde s ands lingualiza ion as
a educ ion o social issues o language (ibid.). One example o lingualiza ion is
he language policy, appa en in almos all EU membe s a es, o educing he
complex p ocess o mig an s’ in eg a ion o language (acquisi ion). The exclu-
si e and p oblem-o ien ed e e ence o people wi h a so-called mig a ion back-
g ound c ea es he imp ession ha only his g oup ’su e s’ om ’iden i y p ob-
lems’. Con e sely, his means ha people who a e no mul ilingual and who
speak he majo i y language a e a peace wi h hemsel es. Fu he mo e, i is as-
sumed ha speaking a language conside ed o be he language o o igin mus
138
7 Mul ilingualism and iden i y cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se
make he speake eel com o able. This o e looks ha in pa icula he mul i-
lingual child en and adolescen s also ha e hei second language and o he lan-
guages a hei disposal, and ha iden i y- ele an con on a ions and lea ning
p ocesses ake place in hese languages, oo.
These ei ying and one-dimensional no ions o iden i y a e g adually being
eplaced in he academic ield by subjec i iza ional and simila pe spec i es,
la gely based on he wo k o Michel Foucaul (1982) and Judi h Bu le (1990).4In
hese pe spec i es, iden i y is no iewed essen ialis ically as a ela i ely closed
gi en, bu as an e e dynamically e ol ing complex sys em o sel - e e ence. Ac-
co ding o hese app oaches, he e is no co e iden i y ha is pu e and in ac and
ha needs o be p o ec ed: i is only h ough add essings and – concomi an – as-
c ip ions ha he e e ence sys em iden i y eme ges, and e e ences a e always
modi ied and con ain con adic ions.5I is he discou ses ha p o ide he knowl-
edge abou oles and a ilia ions ha a e a ibu ed o subjec s and o which hey
a e mo e o less a me cy. In his essay on “Ideology and Ideological S a e Appa-
a uses” Al husse (1977) exempli ies a si ua ion in which someone is called by
a policeman wi h “Hey, you he e!” (Al husse 1977: 142) and u ns owa d he
policeman. Acco ding o Al husse , in he momen o his eac ion and u ning o-
wa ds he policeman, he indi idual becomes a subjec because he ela es he call
o himsel and hus accep s i . Subjec hood and hus iden i y a e unde s ood in
his app oaches as adically decen e ed and always in luenced by discou ses and
p ac ices, h ough which a subjec can be o med. In o he wo ds, iden i y is de-
penden on in oca ion and asc ip ion (Al husse 1977: 108 .). S ua Hall c i ically
conside s he ques ion o a uni a y iden i y on his basis. He w i es ha , con a y
o p e ailing opinion, a e lexi e concep ualiza ion o iden i y canno hold o a
s able co e o he sel . He conside s i impossible o his sel o e ol e h ough
he wis s and u ns o li e wi hou change and o emain he same h ough he
en i e li e ime. He also conside s he idea ha his sel can gua an ee cul u al
uni y and clea ly emphasizes ex e nal di e ences o be an illusion, as is he idea
o ha ing a uni ied his o y o one’s own sel . He conside s such a s o y o be an
un ealis ic na a i e ha only akes place because he e is a need o i (Hall 2004:
170 .). In his opinion, which is also sha ed by o he heo is s o cul u al s udies
( o an o e iew s. Ma cha 2018, esp. Chap. 1: 17 , and Chap. 5: 169 ), iden i ies
4Bo h au ho s ha e published nume ous wo ks on he subjec o subjec i a ion. A e y good
o e iew in English is a ailable in Wiede 2020.
5The e is a di e ence be ween he posi ions o Foucaul and Bu le in ha Bu le g an s he
subjec g ea e eedom o decision and ac ion han Foucaul (Foucaul 1982, Bu le 1990, Wiede
2020).
139
İnci Di im
a e cons uc ed, in e wo en, and associa ed wi h con adic o y discou ses, p ac-
ices, and posi ions, and hey a e cons an ly changing and ans o ming (Spies
2009 w.p.).
Le ’s e u n o ou s a ing poin , language. When language is used in i s sym-
bolic unc ion as a ma ke o o igin and iden i y, he c ucial poin is he ques-
ion how o igin is concep ualized in his p ocess. Re e ences loaded wi h con-
s uc ions o o igin a e b ough o subjec s, a ec hem, a e ca ied o wa d in
di e en ways, and a e inco po a ed in o discou ses ha p o ide igu es o a -
gumen a ion wi h which subjec s a e es ablished. Foucaul poin s ou ha i is
a o m o powe ha u ns indi iduals in o subjec s (Foucaul 2005: 275). How-
e e , powe he e is no hough o as some hing “bad” pe se, bu as a p oduc-
i e o ce. Sel -concep ions depend on he a ibu ions which a e di ec ed a he
subjec s om posi ions o highe powe in socie y. The emphasis is on an in es-
iga ion o he quali ies o a ibu ions, as a esul o which sel -unde s andings
such as “Spania d”, “child”, “beau i ul gi l” e c. a e acqui ed. Subjec i iza ional
app oaches do no dis inguish be ween social and pe sonal iden i y because hey
ques ion he cons uc o an iden i y as such. They unde s and iden i y as an on-
going luid p ocess in which he subjec o ms i sel in he con on a ion wi h a
social en i onmen and a he same ime shapes his en i onmen , so ha pe -
sonal and social ca ego ies canno be sepa a ed. Acco dingly, he subjec de el-
ops in line wi h he accep ance o ejec ion o a ibu ions in social space.
In pedagogical con ex s, i is he e o e impo an o ake a close look a he
a ibu ions ha child en and adolescen s encoun e . In his espec , he wo k
by Vesna Bjegač (2020) is a aluable con ibu ion o he discussion: She analyses
pedagogical discou ses in he academic ield o Ge man as a second language
(GSL, see also Chp. 6) on he connec ion be ween language and educa ion and
ela es his o in e iews wi h young people wi h a so-called mig a ion back-
g ound. She shows how hese adolescen s a e nega i ely in luenced by nega i e
ep esen a ions in he academic ield. In pa icula , young people de elop nega-
i e sel -concep ions wi h ega d o he connec ion be ween language and o igin.
I becomes clea ha he e is a g ea esponsibili y o he academic ield as well
as ela ed pedagogical and educa ional discou ses, as hei discou se can ha e
an in e io izing-subjec i izing e ec . This p oblem is e iden , o example, in a
s udy by Heike Nied ig (2015), whe e s uden s om A ican coun ies epo ha
hei F ench o English is seen as less aluable in he Hambu g schools hey a -
end han he F ench o English o s uden s who a e om Eu ope, o ins ance
om F ance. We see he e a s ong connec ion be ween ( he a ibu ed) coun y
140
7 Mul ilingualism and iden i y cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se
o con inen o o igin and language when i comes o ecogni ion, and we un-
de s and ha ecogni ion di e s when coun ies o o igin a e judged di e en ly
(Nied ig 2015, 7). Rühlmann’s (2023) disse a ion, ollowing s udies in he a ea o
acio-linguis ics, shows ha hese hie a chies a e ela ed o pos colonial alue
hie a chies. Thus, he ex en o which language compe ence is ecognized also
has o do wi h acial ca ego ies.
Agains his backg ound, we can now o mula e mo e p ecisely he ques ion
on he ole o language o iden i y de elopmen in mig a ion socie y con ex s:
Wha add esses o mul ilinguals become isible in connec ion wi h language in
social discou ses and wha a ibu ions do hese add esses con ain? O , o pu i
mo e gene al: To wha ex en do “iden i y asc ip ions” con ain powe ul cul u -
alizing o lingualizing conno a ions h ough which child en, young people, and
also adul s wi h a so-called mig a ion backg ound a e discu si ely u ned in o
in e io subjec s and a e hus disad an aged? These ques ions will be discussed
in he ollowing, using he example o a Eu opean Commission (EC) documen
ha ca ies a discou se- o ming unc ion by manda e.
3 Language and iden i y by o de o he Eu opean
Commission
A he EU le el, mul ilingualism is a p og amme as well as a equi emen . A he
sup ana ional le el, he idea ha mul ilingualism is o undamen al impo ance
p e ails because o he mul ina ionali y and mul ilingualism o he EU. This un-
damen al a i ude has an impac on he iew o mig a ion- ela ed mul ilingual-
ism. In 2008, a newly o med “G oup o In ellec uals o In e cul u al Dialogue”
add essed he issue o mul ilingualism. In he ollowing, I p esen and analyze
a documen p oduced in his con ex . I ca y ou his analysis in he ame o
he subjec i a ion app oaches ou lined abo e, acco ding o which iden i y does
no eme ge on i s own, bu de elops in he cou se o dealing wi h a ibu ions,
especially when hese come om au ho i ies highe in powe . The analysis con-
cen a es on he iden i y- ela ed ideas ha he documen sends ou as a poli ical
s a emen .
4 P oposals o he council o in ellec uals
A he eques o he hen P esiden o he Eu opean Commission, José Manuel
Du ão Ba oso, and he Commissione o Mul ilingualism, Leona d O ban, a
141
İnci Di im
g oup o discou se-shaping ac o s was se up in 2008.6The g oup was gi en he
ask o ad ising he EU Commission “on he con ibu ion o mul ilingualism o
in e cul u al dialogue and mu ual unde s anding among ci izens in he Eu opean
Union”7(Eu opean Commission 2008: 2). In 2008, he Council o In ellec uals
published a epo en i led “A wo hwhile challenge – how mul ilingualism can
con ibu e o he consolida ion o Eu ope”. As a basis o my analysis, I b ie ly
e iew he basic s a emen s o his epo , especially hose ha a e ele an o
ou p esen discussion.
Mus we y o de ine a ‘Eu opean iden i y’? Can his o e come all ou di e -
ences?” (ibid.: 2) These ques ions, classi ied as “eno mously sensi i e” (ibid.: 2),
a e hen ela ed o mul ilingualism: “Ou b ie was o hink abou mul ilingual-
ism and how mul ilingualism migh impac on Eu opean in eg a ion and in e cul-
u al dialogue. The e o e, we decided o lea e aside ou p econcei ed opinions
– bo h op imis ic and pessimis ic – o s a om a comple ely neu al obse a-
ion: Fo any socie y, linguis ic, cul u al, e hnic o eligious di e si y b ings a
he same ime ad an ages and disad an ages, i is a sou ce o ichness bu also
o ensions” (ibid.: 2). The au ho s see he solu ion in aking linguis ic di e si y
in o accoun in a speci ic way: “Respec ing ou linguis ic di e si y does no only
mean aking in o accoun a cul u al eali y based on his o y. E en i he ma-
jo i y o Eu opean na ions we e ounded on he basis o hei iden i y- o ming
languages, he Eu opean Union can only be based on i s linguis ic di e si y. [...]
We e en conside i capable o s anding as a model o he whole o humani y o
an iden i y based on di e si y” (ibid.: 5). Wi h ega d o immig an s, i is s a ed
ha a deep knowledge o he na ional language and he cul u e hey ca y is an
indispensable condi ion o in eg a ion in o he hos socie y, in o de o pa ic-
ipa e in i s economic, social, in ellec ual, a is ic and poli ical li e. Fu he mo e,
he epo unde lines ha Eu opean coun ies mus unde s and he impo ance
o main aining he language o o igin o any immig an o pe son wi h a mi-
g an backg ound. This is jus i ied by an a gumen a ion ha , in u n, ies he
6The g oup was led by he au ho Amin Maalou and included he ollowing membe s: Ju a
Limbach, p esiden o he Goe he-Ins i u ; Sand a P along, communica ions expe ; Simone a
Agnello Ho nby, au ho ; Da id G een, p esiden o EUNIC (Eu opean Ne wo k o Na ional
Cul u al Ins i u es), o me di ec o o he B i ish Council; Edua do Lou enço, philosophe ;
Jaques de Decke , au ho , pe manen sec e a y o he Académie Royale de Langue e de Li -
è a u e ançaises de Belgique; Jan Sokol, philosophe , o me Minis e o Educa ion o he
Czech Republic; Jan Ch is oph G øndahl, au ho ; and Taha Ben Jelloun, au ho (Eu opäische
Kommission 2008: 2).
7The epo was analysed in he Ge man e sion; all quo es ha e been ansla ed by he au ho
(İ.D.) in o English.
142
7 Mul ilingualism and iden i y cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se
loss o iden i y, i s , o he loss o linguis ic compe ence in he so-called ‘mi-
g a ion language’, and, second, pa hologizes i : “A young pe son who loses he
language o his o he ances o s also loses he abili y o communica e wi h his o
he own pa en s in an unclouded manne , which is a ac o o social des abiliza-
ion ha can, in u n, lead o iolence. The exagge a ed a i ma ion o iden i y
o en sp ings om a sense o guil owa d one’s cul u e o o igin, a guil ha
is some imes exp essed in an o e emphasis on eligious componen s. In o he
wo ds, an immig an o a pe son wi h an immig an backg ound who is p o i-
cien in his o he mo he ongue, who can pass i on o his o he child en, who
eels ha his o he language and cul u e o o igin a e ecognized in he hos so-
cie y, would eel less need o quench his o he hi s o iden i y in o he ways”
(ibid.: 21).]The epo begins by s a ing ha linguis ic di e si y is a challenge
o Eu ope. Howe e , he au ho s a gue ha i is a wo hwhile challenge (ibid.
3), which mus be me in an e icien manne . The ollowing ques ion is hen
b ough o he o e: “How can we make i possible o so many di e en peoples
o li e ha moniously oge he ? [...] Mus we y o de ine a ‘Eu opean iden i y’?
Can his o e come all ou di e ences?” (ibid.: 2) These ques ions, classi ied as
“eno mously sensi i e” (ibid.: 2), a e hen ela ed o mul ilingualism: “Ou b ie
was o hink abou mul ilingualism and how mul ilingualism migh impac on
Eu opean in eg a ion and in e cul u al dialogue. The e o e, we decided o lea e
aside ou p econcei ed opinions – bo h op imis ic and pessimis ic – o s a om
a comple ely neu al obse a ion: Fo any socie y, linguis ic, cul u al, e hnic o
eligious di e si y b ings a he same ime ad an ages and disad an ages, i is a
sou ce o ichness bu also o ensions” (ibid.: 2). The au ho s see he solu ion in
aking linguis ic di e si y in o accoun in a speci ic way: “Respec ing ou linguis-
ic di e si y does no only mean aking in o accoun a cul u al eali y based on
his o y. E en i he majo i y o Eu opean na ions we e ounded on he basis o
hei iden i y- o ming languages, he Eu opean Union can only be based on i s
linguis ic di e si y. [...] We e en conside i capable o s anding as a model o
he whole o humani y o an iden i y based on di e si y” (ibid.: 5). Wi h ega d
o immig an s, i is s a ed ha a deep knowledge o he na ional language and
he cul u e hey ca y is an indispensable condi ion o in eg a ion in o he hos
socie y, in o de o pa icipa e in i s economic, social, in ellec ual, a is ic and
poli ical li e. Fu he mo e, he epo unde lines ha Eu opean coun ies mus
unde s and he impo ance o main aining he language o o igin o any immi-
g an o pe son wi h a mig an backg ound. This is jus i ied by an a gumen a ion
ha , in u n, ies he loss o iden i y, i s , o he loss o linguis ic compe ence in
he so-called ‘mig a ion language’, and, second, pa hologizes i : “A young pe son
who loses he language o his o he ances o s also loses he abili y o commu-
143
İnci Di im
E ikson, E ik H. 1982. The li e cycle comple ed. New Yo k: No on.
E ikson, E ik H. 1989. Iden i ä und Lebenszyklus. F ank u am Main: Suh kamp.
Foucaul , Michel. 1982. The subjec and powe . C i ical Inqui y 8(4). 777–795.
Foucaul , Michel (ed.). 2005. Sch i en in ie Bänden. 1s edn. F ank u am Main:
Suh kamp.
Gogolin, Ing id. 1998. De monolinguale Habi us de mul ilingualen Schule. Mün-
s e : Waxmann.
Hall, S ua (ed.). 2004. Ideologie, Iden i ä , Rep äsen a ion. Hambu g: A gumen .
Knappik, Magdalena & Paul Meche il. 2018. Mig a ionshin e g und ode die Kul-
u alisie ung on Ausschlüssen. In Inci Di im & Paul Meche il (eds.), He e o-
geni ä , Sp ache(n) und Bildung, 159–187. Bad Heilb unn: Ve lag Julius Klink-
ha d .
Landesin eg a ions a NRW. 2022. Iden i ä s ä ken – na ü liche zweisp achigkei
ö de n! h ps://landesin eg a ions a .n w/iden i ae -s ae ken-na ue liche-
zweisp achigkei - oe de n/.
Ma cha , Oli e . 2018. Cul u al s udies. 2nd edn. München: u b.
Meche il, Paul. 2001. Pädagogiken na io-kul u elle Meh achzugehö igkei :
Vom „Kul u kon lik “ zu „Hyb idi ä “. Disku s 10(2). 41–48. DOI: 10.25656/01:
10795.
Meche il, Paul. 2003. Kul u elle Iden i ä : Anme kungen zu pädagogischen
B auchba kei eine Pe spek i e. SchulVe wal ung. Spezial 3. 11–13.
Nied ig, Heike. 2015. Pos koloniale Meh sp achigkei und „Deu sch als Zwei -
sp ache“. In Nadja Thoma & Magdalena Knappik (eds.), Mach k i ische Pe -
spek i en au ein p eka isie es Ve häl nis, 69–86. Biele eld: ansc ip Ve lag.
DOI: 10.1515/9783839427071-003.
Pe azzo, Nu ac, Ma ie-Luise Spa ka & Ge i de Jong. 2012. Keine Iden i ä ohne
Sp ache.
Pe chinig, Be nha d & Tobias T oge . 2011. Mig a ionshin e g und als Di e enz-
ka ego ie: Vom no wendigen Kon lik zwischen Theo ie und Empi ie in de
Mig a ions o schung. In Regina Polak (ed.), Zukun . We e. Eu opa: Die eu o-
päische We es udie 1990–2010. Ös e eich im Ve gleich, 283–319. Wien: Böhlau.
DOI: 10.13140/2.1.1999.1684.
Poki sch, Do is. 2022. We sp ich ? Sp achbezogene Subjek i ie ungsp ozesse in de
Schule de Mig a ionsgesellscha . 1s edn. Wiesbaden: Sp inge .
Poki sch, Do is & Vesna Bjegač. 2022. Von (Un-)Möglichkei en meh sp achig zu
sein: Eine subjek i ie ungsanaly ische Be ach ung meh sp achige Bildungs-
konzep e. Zei sch i ü Deu sch im Kon ex on Meh sp achigkei 38(1–2). 83–
98. DOI: 10.14220/oda .2022.38.1.83.
150
7 Mul ilingualism and iden i y cons uc ion in pedagogical discou se
Poki sch, Do is & İnci Di im. 2024. „man muss sich nich angehö ig ühlen“:
Sp achbezogene Zugehö igkei en in de Mig a ionsgesellscha . ide- in o ma-
ionen zu deu schdidak ik. Zei sch i ü den Deu schun e ich in Wissenscha
und Schule 47(4). 12–21.
Rühlmann, Liesa. 2023. Race, language, and subjec i a ion: A aciolinguis ic pe -
spec i e on schooling expe iences in Ge many. Wiesbaden: Sp inge .
Spies, Tina. 2009. Disku s, Subjek und Handlungsmach . Zu Ve knüp ung on
Disku s-und Biog a ie o schung mi hil e des Konzep s de A ikula ion. Fo-
um quali a i e Sozial o schung 10(2). h ps://www.quali a i e- esea ch.ne /
index.php/ qs/a icle/ iew/1150/2761.
Tajmel, Tanja. 2013. Is Kochsalz in ande en Kul u en e wa nich in Wasse lös-
lich? Kul u elle Di e si ä im Chemieun e ich . Na u wissenscha en im Un-
e ich . Chemie 24(135). 15–19.
Thoma, Nadja. 2022. Zu Ve sch änkung de Di e enzka ego ien Sp ache, ace
und Religion. In Yaliz Akbaba, Tobias Buchne , Alisha M. B. Heinemann, Do is
Poki sch & Nadja Thoma (eds.), Leh en und Le nen in Di e enz e häl nissen. In-
e disziplinä e und In e sek ionale Be ach ungen, 67–85. Wiesbaden: Sp inge
Fachmedien Wiesbaden. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-37328-3_4.
Wiede, Wiebke. 2020. Subjec i ica ion, he subjec , and he sel .DOI: 10.14765/zz .
dok-2076.
151
