Chap e 5
(M)o he ongue: How Global Sou h
mul ilingual p ac ices allow unco e ing
mul ilingualisms benea h he in en ed
monolingual Eu opean Sel
F iede ike Lüpke
Helsinki Collegium o Ad anced S udies
This pape , pa o a collec ion on he O he ing o mul ilinguals in linguis ics, ex-
plo es O he ing om he pe spec i e o Global Sou h socie ies, in which mul ilin-
gualism is commonly pe cei ed h ough Eu ocen ic lenses p e alen in cogni i e
science and linguis ics. The pape c i ically examines hese iewpoin s h ough de-
sc ibing he e ec s o p ocesses o O he ing, ocusing pa icula ly on he in en ion
o he Eu opean Sel as a c ucial componen o O he ing and d awing on c i ical
heo y and pos colonial s udies, especially he wo ks o Édoua d Glissan and Gay-
a i Spi ak. The i s p ocess o O he ing in ol es desc ibing he non-Eu opean
O he using Eu ocen ic concep s, whose applicabili y o Global Sou h con ex s
needs o be challenged. Howe e , me ely c i iquing hese concep s wi hin he Sel -
O he amewo k ails o add ess he need o decons uc he Eu opean Sel , in-
en ed as pa o he O he ing p ocess. The cons uc edness o he Eu opean Sel
i sel emphasises he need o a pa adigm shi in linguis ics ha acknowledges
he inadequacy o cu en analy ical amewo ks. This need is compounded by he
e ec s o O he ing on he sel -pe cep ion o he O he , which compels hem o
pe cei e hemsel es h ough ex e nal lenses, o con ibu e o he colonial lib a y
and o pe pe ua e colonial iewpoin s. The pape ad oca es a ecalib a ion o on-
ologies, epis emologies, and me hodologies in he desc ip ion o mul ilingualism
ac oss all se ings. By disman ling he no ion o he monolingual Eu opean Sel ,
he oad is pa ed owa ds no malising dynamic and luid mul ilingualisms, lead-
ing o a mo e comp ehensi e unde s anding o mul ilingualism wo ldwide based
on con i ial esea ch pa adigms.
F iede ike Lüpke. 2025. (M)o he ongue: How Global Sou h mul ilingual p ac ices allow unco -
e ing mul ilingualisms benea h he in en ed monolingual Eu opean Sel . In A emis Alexiadou,
Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese (eds.), The cons uc ion o mul ilin-
guals as O he s: Do we p ac ice wha we p each?, 81–102. Be lin: Language Science P ess. DOI:
10.5281/zenodo.17132447
F iede ike Lüpke
1 In oduc ion: F om c ea ing and desc ibing di e ence o
plu i e sal pe spec i es
(l)’Occiden n’es pas à l’Oues , ce n’es pas un lieu, c’es un p oje . (The
Wes is no in he Wes . I is a p ojec , no a place.) (Glissan 1981: 14)
Among he con ibu ions o his collec ion on O he ing o mul ilinguals in
linguis ics, his essay is he only one co e ing geog aphical se ings ou side Eu-
ope o he Global No h. When concei ing i , I s uggled o ind an angle ha
would cap u e salien ai s o he hugely di e se mul ilingual socie ies in he
Global Sou h in non-O he ing ashion and in a sho chap e . I ound i h ough
looking a all p ocesses associa ed wi h O he ing and by explo ing al e na i e
ways o iden i y o ma ion and knowledge c ea ion in he Global No h and in
he Global Sou h. Th ough in es iga ing in pa icula one p ocess o O he ing,
ha o he in en ion o he Sel , his endea ou becomes ele an o esea ch in
and on Eu ope and he Global No h.
I is now widely accep ed ha No he n/Wes e n pe spec i es domina e cog-
ni i e science and linguis ics. Mul ilingualism is o i s mos pa s pe cei ed
h ough a lens ha akes Eu opean monolingually biased ideas o language1and
o mul ilingualism as he benchma k. This hough p ocess has been desc ibed as
O he ing in philosophy. Th ough O he ing, bo h Sel and O he a e cons i u ed
based on cons uing di e ences be ween he wo, which a e, c ucially, desc ibed
in e ms o no ions g ounded in he ideologies o he Sel . I d aw pa icula ly
on no ions o O he ing as de eloped in c i ical heo y and pos colonial s udies,
mos no ably in he wo ks o Édoua d Glissan and Gaya i Spi ak.
O he ing in colonial con ex s c ea es he O he as he subal e n na i e and im-
poses he epis emological o de o he in en ed Eu opean Sel on hem. The p o-
cess o O he ing is complex and has mul iple consequences. In his pape , I ocus
on he second and hi d, o en o e looked pa s o his p ocess and hei esul s.
Bu le me in oduce he mos widely discussed p ocess o O he ing be o e e u n-
ing o i s o he pa s and hei consequences. Fi s , he non-Eu opean O he is
desc ibed in e ms o concep s aken om he “colonial lib a y“ (Mudimbe 1988)
o compa ed wi h an imagined unma ked Eu opean s a e o a ai s. I is impo -
an o c i ique he alidi y o hese concep s o Global Sou h con ex s. A he
1Te ms deno ing languages and speake s a e based on he images o language as an o al medium
and o en exclude language use s communica ing in o he modali ies, o ins ance use s o sign
languages. Fo wan o a mo e inclusi e e m (e en e ms deno ing sign languages and sign
language linguis ics a e based on a ongue-based me apho in many languages) I use hese
e ms, bu wi h he explici in en ion o including all language use s, no ably sign language
use s.
82
5 (M)o he ongue
same ime, such c i iques do no go beyond he dicho omy Sel -O he . Remain-
ing in his amewo k en ails a me e ‘ alking back’ o he hegemonic place o
heo y building, h ough poin ing ou di e ences. I ha e done so mysel in p e-
ious esea ch (Lüpke 2015, 2016a,b, 2017, 2018, 2021a,b), which was limi ed o
poin ing ou he inapplicabili y o dominan concep s o language, iden i y and
endange men , o A ican social con ex s. Th ough limi ing he discussion o he
unsui abili y o concep s in pa icula sociopoli ical con ex s and he poin ing
ou o di e en p ac ices and language ideas, he Eu opean Sel is le un ouched.
Such esea ch unwi ingly con ibu es o he pe se e ance o a cons uc ed Eu-
ope wi h which o he wo ld egions can be con as ed and o exo icising and
hus main aining he O he . My c i ical s ance in his pape is he e o e one o
sel - e lexi e p ac ice.
The second p ocess o O he ing goes u he han applying Eu ocen ic con-
cep s in O he places. I e e s o he cons uc ion o he Eu opean Sel , building
he p ojec o he Wes , in he p ocess o c ea ing he O he , h ough cons uc -
ing he Sel as an idealised s a e o a ai s, a deon ic modali y a he han an ap-
p aisal o si ua ions. ‘Eu ope’, ‘Eu opean’, ‘ he Wes ’ and ‘Wes e n ci ilisa ion’
a e canonised idealisa ions o di e se and dynamic sociopoli ical con igu a ions
ha only eme ge om and a e ideologically mo i a ed by a desi ed con as wi h
he O he . Wi hou he O he , Eu ope and ela ed no ions ha a e dialec ally
c ea ed canno s and and gi e way o complex, en angled mul i udes. Decolonial
pe spec i es he e o e canno be limi ed o decons uc ing he o me O he ; hey
need o ex end c i ical pe spec i es o disman ling he on ologies and epis emolo-
gies ha c ea ed he Eu opean Sel as well. Such lenses enable empi ical esea ch
combining uni e sal conce ns wi h opennes o he eal di e si y o si ua ions,
whe e e hey a e loca ed. Salikoko Mu wene (2020: 299–300) s a es succinc ly
wha is needed in o de o o e come such O he ing in o de o de elop uly
decolonial ou looks in esea ch as ollows:
Howe e , we should no jus p esen da a om, o iden i y phenomena in,
languages in he global Sou h ha ha e adi ionally no been accoun ed
o wi hin he same analysis pa adigms ha ha e been used o da e. We
mus also show wha analy ical changes a e needed o unde s and he da a
and phenomena mo e adequa ely. O he wise, we a e s ill apped in he
concep ual amewo k and esea ch me hods p o ided by he same ‘colo-
nial linguis ics’. Since simila da a, phenomena, o speake s’/w i e s’ be-
ha iou s may show up in any pa o he wo ld, including he o me colo-
nial me opoles, a pa adigm shi is in o de o a p oduc i e decolonial lin-
guis ics. The p oposed shi […] does no , o cou se, mean ejec ing e e y-
83
F iede ike Lüpke
hing lea ned om esea ch conduc ed o da e. I en ails so ing hings ou
and de e mining wha mus be co ec ed o a be e , plu al linguis ics ha
sheds ligh bo h on uni e sals and on ypological peculia i ies in ways ha
do jus ice o he da a, phenomena, and speake s’/w i e s’ beha iou s. The
pu pose o decolonizing linguis ics should no be o os e a global Sou h
excep ionalism bu o simply accoun mo e adequa ely o he ele an phe-
nomena in ways ha imp o e he p ac ice o linguis ics as a discipline and
cap u e di e si y mo e adequa ely.
The hi d pa o O he ing is ha o o cing he O he s o see hemsel es
h ough ex e nal lenses so ha hey con ibu e o he colonial lib a y by p o-
iding accoun s on expe iences cas in e minologies and on ologies ex e io o
hem, e iden in he pe sis en coloniali y o o mal educa ion sys ems in pos -
colonial con ex s which ep oduce such lenses (Mbembe n.d.).
Language ideas dominan in public imagina ion, ins i u ions and he ield o
linguis ics we e o med as he ou come o a cen u ies-long p ocess o consolida-
ion o e hno oman ic no ions o iden i y culmina ing in e hnolinguis ic na ion
building, as he con ibu ions o his olume c i ically discuss. Resea ch on and
om he Global Sou h, e en i conduc ed in amewo ks ha inhe i ed much
o his e hnona ionalis lib a y, has ques ioned i s basic ene s, unco e ing p ac-
ices and concep s o language ha , when pu in dialogue wi h No he n lan-
guage ideas, enables hei e hinking also o hese se ings. A logical nex s ep
is he e o e o connec esea ch on al e na i e language ideas and p ac ice in he
Global Sou h o eal mul ilingual complexi y and dynamics o language use in
Eu ope, which canno be desc ibed using concep s om he e hnona ionalis li-
b a y ei he . In his pape , al hough I mainly e e ence A ican and o he Global
Sou h mul ilingual se ings, I do no do so wi h he iew o desc ibing hem as
di e en om he ou se . A ca alogue o al e na i e language ideas and p ac ices
‘elsewhe e’ would emain insc ibed in o he logics o O he ing, which demands
o he O he o con o m o he same epis emic scale, e en i his scale is ex ended
(Glissan 1990).
Ra he , my aim is o ex end an in i a ion o ecalib a e and enew on olo-
gies, epis emologies and me hodologies e e ywhe e. All con igu a ions, whe -
e e hey a e loca ed, bene i om new pe spec i es ha a e no based on p imo -
dial di e ences and de y he logic o O he ing h ough being mind ul o con ial-
i y and mul iple connec ions wi hin and be ween se ings. This s ep con ibu es
o no malising complex mul ilingualisms benea h he cons uc ed monolingual
Eu opean Sel ha consequen ly becomes disman led and no longe seen in con-
as o an O he . Such mul ilingualisms also comp ise ma ginalised and mino i-
84
5 (M)o he ongue
ised p ac ices impossible o econcile wi h idealised monolingual expe iences
in Global No h socie ies, om so-called he i age languages and new speake s
o he use o sign languages and all o ms o language use deemed de ian om
he pe spec i e o monolingual s anda d o ms o language (Flo es & Rosa 2015,
de Meulde e al. 2019, Mo ia y & Kus e s 2021, Snell & Cushing 2022, Wiese
2014, 2015).
In he emainde o his pape , I de ine cen al ace s o O he ing o mul ilin-
guals in linguis ics and ske ch al e na i e amewo ks ha can o e come O h-
e ing in Sec ion (2). In Sec ion (3), I illus a e how dynamic ela ionships wi h
people, places and named languages, a he han absolu e and ixed oles o
languages, cha ac e ise linguis ic expe iences and how ecognising his dynam-
ici y can en ich heo isa ions o mul ilingualism. In Sec ion (4), I de elop ideas
o u u e esea ch ha can con ibu e o making mul ilingualism esea ch uly
global.
2 O he ing and al e na i e amewo ks
The e ms ‘O he ing’ and he ‘O he ’ a e he e used as de eloped by Gaya i
Spi ak (1985: 253) in a classic pape on he subjec . She e okes O he ing as
a mul idimensional p ocess o social di e en ia ion which esides on he colo-
nial so e eign/Sel “consolida ing he sel o Eu ope by cons uc ing i as he
so e eign subjec and obliging he na i e o ca hec he space o he O he on his
home g ound.” To pa aph ase, O he ing ope a es h ough cons uc ing an idea o
Eu ope and imposing i on subjec s pe cei ed as di e en , while simul aneously
imposing on hem o become in es ed in hese ca ego ies, o see hemsel es
as O he s. The p ocess un olds h ough making ’na i es’ pe cei e hemsel es
h ough ‘wo lding’ p ac ices o he ou side , hus ep oducing his ex e nal pe -
spec i e; h ough w i ing na a i es ha , e en i hey seemingly es o e igh s,
o ins ance o indigenous languages, ame hem as obliga ions, e.g., in seeing
hese languages as de icien i no s anda dised, equipped wi h a w i en o m
and used in o mal educa ion. Simul aneously, his p ocess ecas s deon ic de-
si e o o de ed s a es o a ai s – o ins ance ha e e ybody should ha e one
language ha exp esses hei iden i y – as law: people ha e one mo he ongue.
As hin ed a wi h hese examples, in he ealm o linguis ics, we can illus a e
hese h ee O he ing p ocesses h ough he imposi ion o on ologies and epis e-
mologies esiding on Eu opean e hnona ionalis concep s. To hese belong no-
ions such as ‘mo he ongue’, he in e p e a ion o iden i y concep s h ough
e hnona ional lenses, as done wi h ‘e hnici y’; o language igh discou ses ha ,
85
F iede ike Lüpke
hough seemingly aiming a p o ec ing linguis ic di e si y c ea e he obliga ion
o do so on he e ms o ins i u ions g ounded in e hnona ionalism. The pe cep-
ion o language ideologies – such as he one ha socie ies a e monolingual, as
po aying eali ies, a he han socio-poli ically mo i a ed ideals also belongs
o hese O he ing mechanisms.
C ucial o Spi ak’s hinking is ha O he ing is no simply a p ocess ha c e-
a es he o he h ough he imposi ion o Eu opean pe spec i es and wo ld iews,
bu also he e y p ocess h ough which Eu ope consolida es i s Sel . Eu opean
on ologies imposed on he O he a e hus no o be unde s ood as cap u ing wi h
any deg ee o e isimili ude p ac ices on he Eu opean con inen i sel ; hey a e
he ou come o language-ideological p ocesses in a ious Eu opean p ojec s o
na ion building, mi o ed in he colonial p ojec s o (mini)na ion building. Thus,
we need o dis inguish be ween a), Eu ope, he con inen in he sense o an in-
e nally complex geog aphic loca ion o shi ing con ou s and oscilla ing in e -
nal composi ion, and b), Eu ope o he Wes as an ongoing p ojec o na a i e
c ea ion (in he sense o Glissan (1981)). These na a i es esul in he e asu e o
p ac ices and speake s dis u bing his desi ed o de and in he iconisa ion o uses
and people con o m o i (Gal & I ine 2019). I is he e o e no enough o poin
ou he inapplicabili y o ca ego ies used o desc ibe he O he and o eplace
hem wi h di e en no ions hen con as ed wi h Eu opean concep s. Ra he ,
le ing go o O he ing also en ails ha he Eu opean Sel canno s and, as ex-
plo ed in se e al con ibu ions o his olume. Howe e , i is no desi able o
simply u n he ables, o make Eu ope he O he o Global Sou h socie ies, as
Spi ak obse es. This would be no only impossible bu also jus esul in an
in e se exo icisa ion based on an ideological p ojec o cons uc ing a gene is-
able Global Sou h as Sel ha hen can e o icise he Global No h. Recalib a ions
and en ichmen s o ideas and concep s o mul ilingualism a e consequen ly no
sugges ed wi h he idea o c ea ing Eu ope as a new O he .2I am pa icula ly
inspi ed by he concep s o ela ionali y and hizomic ne wo ks (Glissan 1990),
con i iali y (Nyamnjoh 2017) and he c ea ion o a plu i e si y cha ac e ised by
“openness o dialogue among di e en epis emic adi ions” (Mbembe n.d.). I en-
do se an epis emology based on he ecogni ion o ha knowledge cons uc ion
is pe spec i al, ha a single pe spec i e is necessa ily incomple e, and ha con-
i iali y es s on he no ion ha all knowledge is c ea ed in dialogue, as e oked
by F ancis Nyamnjoh (2017: 262):
2A adical al e na i e would be, as sugges ed by an anonymous e iewe , “ o hink abou O h-
e ing di e en ly; no as he p ocess o c ea ing he O he ha is dis inc om he Sel bu he
O he who is he o he Sel ”. This in i es, as also ponde ed by he e iewe , o see con i iali y
no necessa ily as an an i hesis o O he ing, bu pe haps o de elop a con i ial iew o he
O he . I am e y open o explo e such a concep ualisa ion bu do no add ess i in his chap e .
86
5 (M)o he ongue
Con i iali y is ecogni ion and p o ision o he ac o eali y o being in-
comple e. I incomple eness is he no mal o de o hings, na u al o o he -
wise, con i iali y in i es us o celeb a e and p ese e incomple eness and
mi iga e he delusions o g andeu ha come wi h ambi ions and claims
o comple eness. No only does con i iali y encou age us o ecognise ou
own incomple eness, i challenges us o be open-minded and open-ended in
ou claims and a icula ions o iden i ies, being and belonging. Con i ial-
i y encou ages us o each ou , encoun e and explo e ways o enhancing o
complemen ing ou sel es wi h he added possibili ies o po ency b ough
ou way by he incomple eness o o he s (human, na u al, supe human and
supe na u al alike), ne e as a ploy o becoming comple e (an ex a agan
illusion ul ima ely), bu o make us mo e e icacious in ou ela ionships
and sociali y.
Con i iali y can hus be seen as an an i hesis o O he ing, which denies he
si ua edness and en anglemen o all hinking. Con i iali y desc ibes socie ies
cons i u ed on he p emise o incomple eness o single en i ies, and on he im-
po ance o b inging oge he di e en pe spec i es, indi iduals, and, in my in-
e p e a ion, languages, o c ea e con i ial in e ac ion.
Fo linguis ics, such a amewo k en ails abandoning soli ude amewo ks
(Cummins 2008) which a e based on he assump ion o he use o a single, non-
a iable s anda d language as he no mal and ideal s a e o a ai s. When ex-
ended o mul ilingualism, a soli ude amewo k is based on he use o se e al
clea ly dema ca ed, non- a iable s anda d languages, ideally occu ing in di -
e en and sepa a e indi iduals, socie ies, geog aphical o sociolinguis ic spaces.
The ou come is egula ed mul ilingualism, a me e mul iplica ion o se e al soli-
udes o language. A con i iali y iew o language and mul ilingualism is based
on adically di e en p emises. Beyond acknowledging mul iplici ies in and o
language, a con i iali y amewo k ex ends o knowledge p oduc ion. I in i es
us o ake esea che s’ and esea ch pa icipan s’ social li es and posi ionali ies
in o accoun and compels us o combine mul iple pe spec i es as he only elici-
ous way o knowledge c ea ion. Such p ac ices in ol e b eaking wi h on ologies
based on a p io i and disc e e ca ego ies, an in en ion o he Sel , and he compa -
ison o his ic ional en i y wi h he O he . Ra he han insis ing on es ablished
on ologies, o on solely desc ibing Global Sou h language ideas and p ac ices as
di e en om hem, an inquisi i e dialogue on how concep s a e cons uc ed
e e ywhe e c ea es a con i ial plu i e si y. The cul i a ion o hospi able ans-
la ion (Diagne 2022), a he han imposi ion and con ol o concep ual lib a ies,
makes dialogue possible.
87
F iede ike Lüpke
3 En iching he concep ual lib a y o mul ilingualism
esea ch in con i ial ways
Mul ilingualism esea ch has di e si ied d ama ically o e he las decade. Today,
i s scope is no limi ed o con empo a y indus ialised socie ies in he Global
No h and pos colonial u ban se ings in he Global Sou h bu also includes
a g owing esea ch ocus on u al si ua ions ex ending in o p ecolonial imes
(Lüpke 2016b, Singe & Ha is 2016, Good e al. 2019, S enzel 2005, Lüpke e al.
2020, Pakendo e al. 2021). Ye , an awa eness o hese (small-scale and u al)
mul ilingual socie ies as globally widesp ead and e olu iona y old (E ans 2017) is
slow o en e mains eam linguis ics, including mul ilingualism esea ch. P e ail-
ing endencies o o eg ounding se ings in he anglosphe e ha e been c i iqued
(Blasi e al. 2022, Hen ich e al. 2010) and O he ing o Global Sou h p ac ices and
esea ch on Global Sou h se ings has been poin ed ou (Kass an 2022, Meye ho
& Nagy 2008, Smakman 2015). Ye , i emains exceedingly a e o ead a s udy
o mul ilingualism in a Global No h se ing ha d aws inspi a ion om Sou h-
e n heo ies o mul ilingualism (Ndhlo u & Makalela 2021, Pennycook & Makoni
2019), and oo many s udies si ua ed in he Global Sou h exclusi ely use Eu o-
cen ic epis emologies and on ologies (Lüpke & S o ch 2013, Makoni 2013). This
ma ginalisa ion is exace ba ed by he deeply inequal ci cula ion o epis emolo-
gies and esea ch ou pu s ha excludes esea ch in and on Global Sou h socie ies
om he global economy o knowledge (Abode in e al. 2023). Con inuing such a
ocus means ha esea ch on se ings a he knowledge pe iphe y, mos no ably
in he Global Sou h, is no seen as ele an ou side he se ings in which i s da a
we e collec ed, echoing Mbembe (n.d.)’s obse a ion ha hey (and A ica in pa -
icula ) a e seen as esidual en i ies, places o da a collec ion ha ha e no much
o con ibu e o heo y o ma ion.
As he o go en and unde esea ched his o y o mul ilingualism in Eu ope
and he Global No h (Pa lenko 2023) eminds us, p e-na ionalis con igu a ions
we e seen as unsui able o he cons uc ion o he Eu opean Sel , and hei his-
o y bu ied unde new iden i y concep s and linguis ic no ions o ideally mono-
lingual speake s and socie ies. Tu ning o he as body o esea ch on Global
Sou h mul ilingualisms is he e o e o p ime impo ance o decen ing Eu o-
pean na a i es no only in and on Global Sou h socie ies (Ndhlo u & Makalela
2021, Makalela 2018, Pennycook & Makoni 2019, Makoni 2013, Adejunmobi 2004)
bu also in and o Global No h socie ies.
Imagina ions o u al socie ies as monolingual e hnolinguis ic communi ies
p io o u banisa ion and mass mig a ion and he con inuing dominan imagi-
na ion o mul ilingualism as mos ly happening in “supe di e se” Global No h
88
5 (M)o he ongue
socie ies (Ve o ec 2007) hinde s a ull app ecia ion o mul ilingual socie ies, in-
cluding in Eu ope. These assump ions a e based on he cen al ene ha e h-
nona ionalis language ideas a e uni e sal AND ha hey cap u ed he eali y o
language use in (some) socie ies p io o ecen dis u bances o his o de .
In he ollowing, a he han a emp ing a ( u ile and inescapably O he ing)
o e iew o how mul ilingual socie ies ou side Eu ope unc ion, I illus a e how
in eg a ing concep s om hese se ings can se e o disman le dominan no ions
in Eu ope and es ablish a con i ial dialogue as a basis o explo ing he meanings
o language in a non-de e minis ic manne .
I will mainly ocus on a guing agains he ollowing no ions:
• Language use s ideally being speake s and w i e s o one language, and
language as he mos p ominen ma ke o (e hnic) iden i y.
• Languages ha ing absolu e a ibu es (“indigenous” s. “colonial”, “mo he
ongue”, “e hnic language”, “lingua anca”, e c.).
• Roles iden i ied o languages, such as “mo he ongue” cap u ing social
eali ies a he han language ideologies.
• Languages as ei ied, uni o mly e i o ialised and used by speech commu-
ni ies ha a e also language communi ies.
• Mul ilingualism, mixing and con ac as special (and always iden i iable)
cases, o as new, u ban and young.
The ca ego ies o mo he ongue and na i e speake a e p ime examples o no-
ions o igina ing om a Eu opean desi e o essen ialise iden i ies (Bon iglio 2010)
in he wake o he o ma ion o monolingually imagined na ion s a es. Mo he
ongue is an imp ecise signi ie in he Lacanian sense, bu he UNESCO (2025)
de ini ion “a language lea ned in childhood in he home en i onmen , also e-
e ed o as mo he ongue, i s language, o na i e language”, in u n con ain-
ing se e al signi ie s ha ci cula ly ein o ce each o he , is ep esen a i e o
con empo a y a emp s o u n i in o a sign wi h conc e e meaning. Tha he
ca ego y o mo he ongue is no applicable o mul ilinguals quickly eme ges, o
ins ance when sociolinguis s and educa ion planne s in Senegal and Mali eso
o he use he F ench loanwo d langues ma e nelles o designa e mo he ongues
o wan o a ansla ion equi alen ha is no sys ema ically misunde s ood as
meaning ‘mo he ’s languages’, ha is, he language(s) spoken by one’s mo he .
S a ing hei mo he ongues p esen s mul ilinguals wi h he conund um o see-
ing hemsel es h ough he p ism o Eu opean language ideologies.
89
F iede ike Lüpke
co esponding o a clea se o linguis ic ea u es and used in s anda d-based
w i ing. Acco ding o mo he - ongue-based monolingual ideologies, hey a e ex-
cluded om owning la ge pa s o hei epe oi es, ei he because hey con ain
non- alo ised Sou he n o ms o languages o Eu opean p o enance o because
hey a e seen as impu e and de icien . Ad oca ing o con i ial mul ilingualism
means ac i ely encou aging con i ial ideas o language and con i ial language
use. The e y ac ha I am cons ained by deeply oo ed No he n academic
adi ions o w i e his a icle in a s ongly ei ied o m o English, which is
supposed o ins an ia e ‘na i e’ o ‘na i e-like’ p o iciency and keep sepa a e
a ie ies o English ha luidly in e mesh in my language use ( o ins ance by
choosing ei he ‘Ame ican English’ o ‘B i ish English’) while a he same ime
emaining excluded om being a ‘na i e speake ’ o claiming owne ship o his
language illus a es he eno mi y o his ask. And I am w i ing as a p i ileged
Eu opean s eeped in s anda d language cul u e and schooled in s anda d B i ish
English. Fo “mul icephalous” language use s ac oss he globe (Sow 2021), he
s anda d languages imposed on hem a e he me opoli an o ms o colonial lan-
guages o (pos )colonially c ea ed s anda d e sion o ‘ hei ’ languages (Ngué
Um 2015), he eby disowning hem and disquali ying hei con i ial p ac ices, a
s a us quo ha we need o unsea .
Re e ences
Abode in, Isabella, Di ine Fuh, Eyob Balcha Geb ema iam & Puleng Segalo. 2023.
Beyond ‘equi able pa ne ships’: The impe a i e o ans o ma i e esea ch
collabo a ions wi h A ica. Global Social Challenges Jou nal 2(2). 212–228. DOI:
10.1332/27523349Y2023D000000002.
Adejunmobi, Mo adewun. 2004. Ve nacula pala e . Imagina ions o he local and
non-na i e languages in Wes A ica. B is ol: Mul ilingual Ma e s.
Agha, Asi . 2005. Voice, oo ing, en egis e men . Jou nal o Linguis ic An h opol-
ogy 15. 38–59.
Ande son, Benedic Richa d O’Go man. 1983. Imagined communi ies. Re lec ions
on he o igin and sp ead o na ionalism. London, New Yo k: Ve so. h p://hdl.
handle.ne /2027/heb.01609..
Appiah, Kwame An hony. 2018. The lies ha bind. Re hinking iden i y: C eed,
coun y, colou , class, cul u e. London: P o ile Books.
Bala on-Ch imes, Saman ha. 2021. Who a e Kenya’s 42(+) ibes? The census and
he poli ical u ili y o magical unce ain y. Jou nal o Eas e n A ican S udies
15(1). 43–62. DOI: 10.1080/17531055.2020.1863642.
96
5 (M)o he ongue
Blasi, Damián E., Joseph Hen ich, E angelia Adamou, Da id Kemme e & Asi a
Majid. 2022. O e - eliance on English hinde s cogni i e science. T ends in Cog-
ni i e Sciences 26(12). 1153–1170. DOI: 10.1016/j. ics.2022.09.015.
Blommae , Jan. 2010. The sociolinguis ics o globaliza ion. Camb idge: Camb idge
Uni e si y P ess.
Bon iglio, Thomas Paul. 2010. Mo he ongues and na ions: The in en ion o he
na i e speake . Be lin & Bos on: De G uy e Mou on.
Canu , Cécile. 2021. P o incialise la langue: Langage e colonialisme. Pa is: Édi-
ions Ams e dam.
Cummins, Jim. 2008. Teaching o ans e : Challenging he wo soli udes as-
sump ion in bilingual educa ion. In Nancy H. Ho nbe ge (ed.), Encyclopedia
o language and educa ion, 1528–1538. Bos on: Sp inge .
Cushing, Ian. 2021. “say i like he Queen”: The s anda d language ideology and
language policy making in English p ima y schools. Language, Cul u e and
Cu iculum 34(3). 321–336. DOI: 10.1080/07908318.2020.1840578.
de Meulde , Maa je, Annelies Kus e s, E in Mo ia y & Joseph J. Mu ay. 2019.
Desc ibe, don’ p esc ibe: The p ac ice and poli ics o anslanguaging in he
con ex o dea signe s. Jou nal o Mul ilingual and Mul icul u al De elopmen
40(10). 892–906. DOI: 10.1080/01434632.2019.1592181.
Di Ca lo, Pie paolo. 2016. Mul ilingualism, a ilia ion, and spi i ual insecu i y.
F om phenomena o p ocesses in language documen a ion. Language Docu-
men a ion and Conse a ion Special Publica ion 10. 71–104.
Diagne, Souleymane Bachi . 2021. Le ago de ma mémoi e. Pa is: Philippe Rey.
Diagne, Souleymane Bachi . 2022. De langue à langue. L’hospi ali é de la aduc-
ion. Pa is: Albin Michel (Biblio hèque Albin Michel Idées).
Ecke , Penelope. 2012. Th ee wa es o a ia ion s udy. The eme gence o mean-
ing in he s udy o sociolinguis ic a ia ion. Annual Re iew o An h opology
41(1). 87–100. DOI: 10.1146/annu e -an h o-092611-145828.
E ans, Nicholas. 2017. Did language e ol e in mul ilingual se ings? Biology &
Philosophy 32(6). 905–933. DOI: 10.1007/s10539-018-9609-3.
Flo es, Nelson & Jona han Rosa. 2015. Undoing app op ia eness: Raciolinguis ic
ideologies and language di e si y in educa ion. Ha a d Educa ional Re iew
85(2). 149–171. DOI: 10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149.
Gal, Susan & Judi h T. I ine. 2019. Signs o di e ence: Language and ideology in
social li e. Camb idge & New Yo k: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. DOI: 10.1017/
9781108649209.
Ga cía, O elia. 2009. Educa ion, mul ilingualism and anslanguaging in he 21s
cen u y. In Educa ion, mul ilingualism and mul ilingual educa ion o social
jus ice: Globalising he local, 140–158. New Delhi: O ien Blackswan.
97
F iede ike Lüpke
Ga cía, O elia & Wei Li. 2014. T anslanguaging: Language, bilingualism and edu-
ca ion. Basings oke [England]: Palg a e Macmillan.
Glissan , Édoua d. 1981. Le discou s an illais. Pa is: Seuil.
Glissan , Édoua d. 1990. Poé ique de la ela ion. Pa is: Gallima d.
Good, Je , Pie paolo Di Ca lo & Rachel Ojong. 2019. Mul ilingualism in u-
al A ica. Ox o d: Ox o d Resea ch Enclopedias. DOI: 10 . 1093 / ac e o e /
9780199384655.013.227.
Goodchild, Saman ha. 2016. “Which language(s) a e you o ?” “I am o all he
languages.” Re lec ions on b eaking h ough he ances al code: T ials o soci-
olinguis ic documen a ion. SOAS Wo king Pape s in Linguis ics 18. 75–91.
Goodchild, Saman ha & Mi iam Weidl. 2018. T anslanguaging p ac ices in he
Casamance: Simila bu di e en – wo case s udies. In A i She is & Elisabe a
Adami (eds.), Making signs, anslanguaging e hnog aphies: Explo ing u ban,
u al and educa ional spaces, 133–151. B is ol: Mul ilingual Ma e s.
G amling, Da id. 2016. The in en ion o monolingualism. London: Bloomsbu y
Academic.
Hen ich, Joseph, S e en J. Heine & A a No enzayan. 2010. The wei des peo-
ple in he wo ld? Beha io al and B ain Sciences 33(2-3). 61–83. DOI: 10.1017/
S0140525X0999152X.
Kass an, Jona han R. 2022. Wha ’s so s anda d abou s anda ds? Asia-Paci ic Lan-
guage Va ia ion 8(2). 139–149.
Laakso, Johanna. 2022. The making o he U alic na ion-s a e languages. In Ma -
ianne Bak ó-Nagy, Johanna Laakso & Elena Sk ibnik (eds.), The Ox o d guide
o he U alic languages, 59–67. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Li, Wei. 2018. T anslanguaging as a p ac ical heo y o language. Applied Linguis-
ics 39(1). 9–30. DOI: 10.1093/applin/amx039.
Lüpke, F iede ieke. 2019. Language endange men and language documen a ion
in A ica. In Ekkeha d Wol (ed.), The Camb idge handbook o A ican linguis-
ics, 468–490. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2015. Ideologies and ypologies o language endange men in
A ica. In Language documen a ion and endange men in A ica, 59–105. Ams-
e dam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2016a. Pu e ic ion: The in e play o indexical and essen ialis
ideologies and he e ogeneous p ac ices. A iew om Agnack. Language Doc-
umen a ion and Conse a ion Special Publica ion 10. 8–39.
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2016b. Unco e ing small-scale mul ilingualism. C i ical Mul i-
lingualism S udies 4(2). 35–74.
98
5 (M)o he ongue
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2017. A ican(is ) pe spec i es on i ali y: Fluidi y, small
speake numbe s, and adap i e mul ilingualism make ib an ecologies (Re-
sponse o Mu wene). Language 93(4). 275–279. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0071.
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2018. Mul iple choice: Language use and cul u al p ac ice in
u al Casamance be ween con e gence and di e gence. In C eoliza ion and
pidginiza ion in con ex s o pos colonial di e si y. Language, cul u e, iden i y,
181–208. Leiden: B ill.
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2021a. Pa e ns and pe spec i es shape pe cep ion: Epis emo-
logical and me hodological e lec ions on he s udy o small-scale mul ilingual-
ism. In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingualism 25(4). 878–900.
Lüpke, F iede ike. 2021b. S anda diza ion in highly mul ilingual con ex s: The
shi ing in e p e a ions, limi ed each, and g ea symbolic powe o e hnona-
ionalis isions. In The Camb idge handbook o s anda d languages, 139–169.
Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Lüpke, F iede ike & Ib ahima Abdoul Hayou Cissé. 2023. Legi imising luid mul-
ilingual p ac ices: A challenge o o mal educa ion wo ldwide. In Mul ilin-
gual lea ning: Assessmen , ideologies and policies in sub-Saha an A ica, 43–64.
London: Rou ledge.
Lüpke, F iede ike, K is ine S enzel, Flo a Cabalza , Thiago Chacon, Aline da C uz
& B una F anche o. 2020. Compa ing u al mul ilingualism in Lowland Sou h
Ame ica and Wes e n A ica. An h opological Linguis ics 62(1). 3–57.
Lüpke, F iede ike & Anne S o ch. 2013. Repe oi es and choices in A ican lan-
guages. Be lin & New Yo k: Mou on de G uy e .
Lüpke, F iede ike & Rachel Wa son. 2020. Language con ac in wes A ica. In
The Rou ledge handbook o language con ac , 528–549. London: Rou ledge.
Makalela, Leke i. 2015. Mo ing ou o linguis ic boxes: The e ec s o anslan-
guaging s a egies o mul ilingual class ooms. Language and Educa ion 29(3).
200–217. DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2014.994524.
Makalela, Leke i. 2016. Ubun u anslanguaging: An al e na i e amewo k o
complex mul ilingual encoun e s. Sou he n A ican Linguis ics and Applied
Language S udies 34(3). 187–196. DOI: 10.2989/16073614.2016.1250350.
Makalela, Leke i (ed.). 2018. Shi ing lenses: Mul ilanguaging, decolonisa ion and
educa ion in he Global Sou h. Cape Town: CASAS.
Makoni, Sin ee B. 2013. An in eg a ionis pe spec i e on colonial linguis ics.
Language Sciences 35. 87–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2012.06.001.
Mbembe, Achille. N.d. Decolonizing knowledge and he ques ion o he a chi e.
T ansc ip o a public lec u e a he Uni e si y o he Wi wa e s and.
99
F iede ike Lüpke
Meye ho , Mi iam & Naomi Nagy (eds.). 2008. Social li es in language: Sociolin-
guis ics and mul ilingual speech communi ies: Celeb a ing he wo k o Gillian
Sanko . Ams e dam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/impac .24.
Mignolo, Wal e D. 1996. Linguis ic maps, li e a y geog aphies, and cul u al
landscapes: Languages, languaging, and ( ans)na ionalism. Mode n Language
Qua e ly 57(2). 181–196. DOI: 10.1215/00267929-57-2-181.
Mo ia y, E in & Annelies Kus e s. 2021. Dea cosmopoli anism: Calib a ing as
a mo al p ocess. In e na ional Jou nal o Mul ilingualism 18(2). 285–302. DOI:
10.1080/14790718.2021.1889561.
Mudimbe, Valen in Y. 1988. The in en ion o A ica. Blooming on, IN: Indiana
Uni e si y P ess.
Mu wene, Salikoko S. 2020. Decolonial linguis ics as pa adigm shi : A commen-
a y. In Colonial and decolonial linguis ics: Knowledges and epis emes, 289–300.
Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Mugane, John M. 2015. The s o y o Swahili. A hens Ohio: Ohio Uni e si y P ess in
associa ion wi h he Ohio Uni e si y Cen e o In e na ional S udies (A ica
in wo ld his o y).
Mye s-Sco on, Ca ol. 1993. Social mo i a ions o codeswi ching: E idence om
A ica. Ox o d: Cla endon P ess.
Ndhlo u, Finex. 2018. Language, e nacula discou se and na ionalisms: Unco e -
ing he my hs o ansna ional wo lds. London: Palg a e Macmillan.
Ndhlo u, Finex & Leke i Makalela. 2021. Decolonising mul ilingualism in A ica
(C i ical language and li e acy s udies 26). B is ol: Mul ilingual Ma e s.
Ngué Um, Emmanuel. 2015. Some challenges o language documen a ion in
A ican mul ilingual se ings. In Language documen a ion and endange men
in A ica, 195–212. Ams e dam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Nyamnjoh, F ancis B. 2017. Incomple eness: F on ie A ica and he cu ency o
con i iali y. Jou nal o Asian and A ican S udies 52(3). 253–270. DOI: 10.1177/
0021909615580867.
Pakendo , B igi e, Nina Dob ushina & Olesya Khanina. 2021. A ypology o
small-scale mul ilingualism. In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingualism 25(4). 835–
859. DOI: 10.1177/13670069211023137.
Pa lenko, Ane a (ed.). 2023. Mul ilingualism and his o y. Camb idge: Camb idge
Uni e si y P ess.
Pennycook, Alas ai & Sin ee Makoni. 2019. Inno a ions and challenges in applied
linguis ics om he global Sou h. London: Rou ledge.
Pie ikäinen, Sa i. 2021. Powe ed by assemblage: Language o mul iplici y. In-
e na ional Jou nal o he Sociology o Language Volume 2021. 235–240. DOI:
10.1515/ijsl-2020-0074.
100
5 (M)o he ongue
Rambukwella, Ha shana. 2021. The poli ics o language schola ship: The e a e
no uly global conce ns. In e na ional Jou nal o he Sociology o Language
267-268. 253–257. DOI: 10.1515/ijsl-2020-0057.
Schneide , B i a. 2018. Me hodological na ionalism in linguis ics. Language Sci-
ences 76. 1–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2018.05.006.
Sil e s ein, Michael. 2003. Indexical o de and he dialec ics o sociolinguis ic li e.
Language & Communica ion 23. 193–229.
Sil e s ein, Michael. 2015. How language communi ies in e sec : Is “supe di e -
si y” an inc emen al o ans o ma i e condi ion? Language & Communica ion
44. 7–18. DOI: 10.1016/j.langcom.2014.10.015.
Singe , Ru h & Salome Ha is. 2016. Wha p ac ices and ideologies suppo small-
scale mul ilingualism? A case s udy o unexpec ed language su i al in an
Aus alian indigenous communi y. In e na ional Jou nal o he Socie y o Lan-
guage 241. 163–208.
Smakman, Dick. 2015. The wes e nising mechanisms in sociolinguis ics. In Glob-
alising sociolinguis ics: Challenging and expanding heo y, 16–35. London &
New Yo k: Rou ledge Taylo & F ancis G oup.
Snell, Julia & Ian Cushing. 2022. “a lo o hem w i e how hey speak”: Policy,
pedagogy and he policing o ‘nons anda d’ English. Li e acy 56(3). 199–211.
DOI: 10.1111/li .12298.
Sow, Ndiémé. 2021. In a wo ld o linguis ic ‘mul icephalism’, wha ools a e
needed o success ul inclusi e educa ion? In Language and he sus ainable
de elopmen goals: Selec ed pape s om he 12 h Language and De elopmen
Con e ence, 89–96. Daka : B i ish Council.
Spi ak, Gaya i Chak a o y. 1985. The Rani o Si mu : An essay in eading he
a chi es. His o y and Theo y 24(3). 247–272. DOI: 10.2307/2505169.
S enzel, K is ine. 2005. Mul ilingualism in he No hwes amazon, e isi ed. h p:
//www.ailla.u exas.o g/si e/cilla2/S enzel_CILLA2_ aupes.pd .
Swiga , Leigh. 1992. Two codes o one? The inside s’ iew and he desc ip ion o
codeswi ching in daka . Jou nal o Mul ilingual and Mul icul u al De elopmen
13(1-2). 83–102. DOI: 10.1080/01434632.1992.9994485.
Tagliamon e, Sali. 2016. Making wa es: The s o y o a ia ionis sociolinguis ics.
Chiches e , Wes Sussex: Wiley Blackwell.
Tan, Amy. 1990. Mo he ongue. The Th eepenny Re iew 43. 7–8.
UNESCO. 2025. Home language. h ps://uis.unesco.o g/en/glossa y- e m/home-
language (17 Ap il, 2025).
Ve o ec, S e en. 2007. Supe -di e si y and i s implica ions. E hnic and Racial
S udies 30(6). 1024–1054. DOI: 10.1080/01419870701599465.
101
F iede ike Lüpke
Wiese, Heike. 2014. Voices o linguis ic ou age: S anda d language cons uc s
and he discou se on new u ban dialec s. Wo king Pape s in U ban Language
and Li e acies 120. 1–25.
Wiese, Heike. 2015. “This mig an s’ babble is no a Ge man dialec !”: The in e ac-
ion o s anda d language ideology and ‘us’/‘ hem’-dicho omies in he public
discou se on a mul ie hnolec . Language in Socie y 44(3). 341–368.
Wiese, Heike. 2023. G amma ical sys ems wi hou language bo de s: Lessons om
ee- ange language (Concep ual Founda ions o Language Science 9). Be lin:
Language Science P ess. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10276182.
102
