Chap e 1
In oduc ion: Mul ilinguals as O he s
A emis Alexiadou
Leibniz-Zen um Allgemeine Sp achwissenscha (ZAS); Humbold Uni e si ä
zu Be lin
Claudio Sca aglie i
Uni e si é de Lausanne
Ch is oph Sch oede
Uni e si ä Po sdam
Heike Wiese
Humbold -Uni e si ä zu Be lin
1 Mul ilinguals as O he s
Mul ilingualism is he no mal condi ion o con empo a y as well as his o ical
human socie ies (e.g., G osjean 2010). Howe e , Eu opean na ion-s a e building
has led o a s ong “monolingual habi us” (Gogolin 2002) ha cons uc s a com-
muni y o monolingual speake s as bea e s o a na ion (O ega 2009, G osjean
2010, Cook 2016). This e ases o exo icises mul ilinguis ic p ac ices and excludes
mul ilingual speake s.
The e ec s o his exclusion a e isible in he public discou se on mul ilingual
speake s, whe e we ind a widesp ead “O he ing” o mul ilingual speake s, un-
de s ood as cons uc ing hem as membe s o a social and linguis ic ou -g oup
(Lamon & Molná 2002, De in 2015). Such O he ing is, o example, e iden o
A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese. 2025.
In oduc ion: Mul ilinguals as O he s. 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?, 1–9. Be lin: Language Science P ess. DOI: 10.5281/
zenodo.17132439
A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese
speake s om he i age language backg ounds, ha is, speake s who ha e g own
up wi h an addi ional language ha is no he socie al majo i y language, ypi-
cally as a esul o mig a ion in an ea lie gene a ion (e.g., immig an pa en s
o g andpa en s). E en i such speake s ha e been bo n and aised locally, hei
belonging o he na ional and linguis ic in-g oup is o en dispu ed, and hey a e
socially and linguis ically excluded.
Such O he ing is no es ic ed o public discou se bu is also ound in ou own
p ac ice as p o essionals wo king in linguis ics and ela ed ields. In ea lie ac-
coun s, mul ilingualism and language con ac we e o en ega ded as excep ional.
Mul ilingualism was seen as a cogni i e p oblem, o mul ilingual speake s we e
ega ded as a da a p oblem. The i s pa e n is illus a ed by a quo e om Jes-
pe sen (1922: 148), who s a es:
Fi s o all, he child [...] ha dly lea ns ei he o he wo languages as pe -
ec ly as he would ha e done i he had limi ed himsel o one. [...] he does
no eally command he ine poin s o he language. [...] Secondly, he b ain
e o equi ed o mas e wo languages ins ead o one ce ainly diminishes
he child’s powe o lea ning o he hings which migh and ough o be
lea n .
This pa e n o p oblema ising mul ilingualism was p esen all he way o he
1960s (A hanasopoulos 2016), as seen, o ins ance, in Weisge be ’s (1966) claim
ha ea ly mul ilingualism leads o men al, cogni i e, and mo al p oblems.
The second pa e n, seeing mul ilingual speake s as a po en ial p oblem o
he da a, led o excluding hem om linguis ic analysis, as e iden in he ea lie
s uc u al linguis ic adi ion, o ins ance in de Saussu e’s (1916) ocus on an ide-
alised, s able, and implici ly monolingual language sys em (“ o me idéale”) and
Chomsky’s (1965) assump ion o an ideal monolingual (na i e) speake -lis ene .
Since hen, he ield has mo ed o wa d, and oday mul ilingualism is gene -
ally accep ed as a no mal condi ion o human language in ou discipline. Di-
e si y is unde s ood as a cen al aspec o language, cap u ed, o ins ance,
h ough app oaches o linguis ic mul i-compe ence (c . con ibu ions in Cook
& Li Li 2016), and by such concep s as anslanguaging, me olingualism and
o he s wi hin wha Pennycook (2016) called he “ ans-supe -poly-me o mo e-
men ” (e.g., Jaspe s & Madsen 2019).
This has led o a e iew o esea ch pe spec i es, ca ego ies, and e minology,
including: e-e alua ions o such concep s as “na i e speake ”, in pa icula in
second language acquisi ion,1and la ely also in o he domains such as psycholin-
1See O ega (2009), Cook (2016), Gudmes ad e al. (2022), Shad o a e al. (2021).
2
1 In oduc ion: Mul ilinguals as O he s
guis ics and he i age language esea ch;2c i iques o hegemonic assump ions o
monolingualism, s anda d language, and i s links wi h ace/e hnici y;3and an
engagemen wi h pos -colonial s udies, which ha e ecen ly ecei ed g owing
in e es in linguis ics.4
This also in ol ed he de elopmen o al e na i es o hegemonic e minology
su ounding mul ilingualism and mul ilingual speake s. Examples o his a e
he concep o “( ans-)languaging” o he use o linguis ic esou ces in mul ilin-
gual p ac ices (e.g., Ga cía 2009), he in oduc ion o he e m “new speake s” o
eplace he no ion o second language lea ne s (e.g., O’Rou ke & Pujola 2015),
o an unde s anding o new linguis ic p ac ices among adolescen s as “con em-
po a y u ban e nacula s” (Ramp on 2010) o “new u ban dialec s” (Wiese 2013,
Ke swill & Wiese 2022), a he han e hnolec s.
So, does ha mean ha oday, we p ac ice wha we p each? We belie e ha
he e is a s ill a way o go in o de o achie e his. The c i ical discussion o o h-
e ing mul ilingual speake s is s ill ongoing, and u he mo e, i has been mos ly
es ic ed o con empo a y sociolinguis ics and no sp ead subs an ially o o he
a eas o linguis ics. A close look a ou ield shows ha he e ec s o exo icis-
ing and p oblema ising mul ilingualism s ill o e shadow ou p ac ice oday, and
his includes sociolinguis ic, con ac -linguis ic, psycholinguis ic, and ypological
esea ch.
Add essing his issue, he con ibu ions o his olume ake a close look a
O he ing p ac ices no only in he public discussion and educa ional p ac ice,
bu also in academia, wi h a ocus on linguis ics.5They p o ide c i ical e lec-
ion o common p ac ices in ou own ield, and discuss he implica ions and chal-
lenges o his o ou esea ch. The con ibu o s add ess concep ual aming and
labelling, me hodology, and esea ch biases in a b oad spec um o app oaches.
They discuss he social con ex o O he ing in linguis ics (Sca aglie i), labelling
p ac ices in published wo k om linguis ics and ela ed ields (Wiese), and he
cons uc ion o mul ilinguals as O he s in a ange o linguis ic subdisciplines,
including he i age language syn ac ic esea ch (Alexiadou; Bunk), second lan-
guage acquisi ion (Gampe , Sch oede , Schlauch & S einbock), language each-
ing (Di im), desc ip i e and documen a y linguis ics (Lüpke), and in ou each
ac i i ies (Pu ka ho e ).
2C . Cheng e al. (2022) o psycholinguis ics; Tsehaye e al. (2022), Wiese e al. (2021, 2022),
Ro hman e al. (2023) on he i age language esea ch.
3Fo ins ance, Rosa & Flo es (2017).
4C . Rosa & Flo es (2017), Wa nke (2019), Rash & Ho an (2020), Deume e al. (2020).
5C . Di im (2016) on such ela ed ields as pedagogics and language didac ics.
3
A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese
2 Con ibu ions o his olume
Claudio Sca aglie i’s pape (Ch.2) s a s he olume wi h a discussion o he so-
cial con ex in which O he ing in linguis ics occu s, hus se ing as a backg ound
o he o he chap e s. As he a gues, linguis ic esea ch ope a es wi hin speci ic
socie al con ex s and is in luenced by hem. An example a e wide-sp ead olk
concep s o ‘Us’ s. ‘Them’ ha a e in ol ed in o he ing mul ilinguals and can
also a ec linguis ic esea ch. Sca aglie i p esen s an analysis o such O he ing
in public discou se using a co pus o 49 news media ex s om Ge many, Aus-
ia, and Swi ze land. He inds pa e ns o labelling mul ilinguals as geog aphic,
na ional, o eligious O he s ha ha e pa allels wi h hose e iden in linguis ics
(see Ch.3). Analysing nega i e e alua ions o mul ilingual O he s, he shows ha
O he s a e cha ac e ised by de ia ions om libe al alues and blamed o socie al
p oblems and challenges.
In Ch.3, Heike Wiese con inues wi h he opic o labelling wi h a ocus on la-
belling p ac ices in academic discou se. He analysis o O he ing in published
wo k om linguis ics and ela ed ields o sociology and educa ion e eals e-
cu ing opoi ha eed in o h ee s ands o O he ing, namely O he ing wi h
espec o e i o ial belonging, o na ional g oup membe ship, and o linguis ic
owne ship. Examples come om publica ions ac oss di e en pe spec i es, sub-
disciplines, and esea ch domains, unde lining how widesp ead such p ac ices
a e in ou ield. Wiese a gues ha a oiding such O he ing is no only impo an
om he poin o iew o schola ly e minology, bu also o linguis ic esea ch
pe spec i es: i mul ilinguals a e cons uc ed as O he s, his can lead o an im-
plici bias wi h nega i e e ec s on linguis ic esea ch.
Alexiadou’s con ibu ion (Ch.4) akes up he issue o esea ch pe spec i es by
discussing me hodological O he ing. Looking a esea ch on he i age speake s’
g amma s and lexicons, she a ge s O he ing h ough monolingual con ols. She
c i icises he no ion o he monolingual na i e speake as he model speake , and
he de ici aming o he i age speake s in o mal and expe imen al linguis ics.
She a gues ha such pe spec i es ha e o be o e come, and suppo s he poin
h ough ou case s udies showing ha he same ac o s in luence monolingual as
well as he i age speake s’ linguis ic beha iou . In he con ibu ion, she analyses
he i age speake s and monolingual speake s o G eek, a ge ing di e ences wi h
espec o ag eemen in es ic i e ela i e clauses, ag eemen misma ches in ad-
jec i al modi ica ion, gende misma ches, and he use o pe iph as ic clauses. She
shows ha hese di e ences a e d i en by ep esen a ional economy and analy -
ici y; howe e , hese ac o s shape no only he i age speake s’ g amma s, bu
also monolingual g amma s. T ea ing he i age speake s’ language as de icien
4
1 In oduc ion: Mul ilinguals as O he s
he e o e dep i es esea che s o he abili y o in es iga e and unde s and im-
po an aspec s ha con ibu e o linguis ic a ia ion.
In Ch.5, Oli e Bunk’s c i ique a ge s he s udy o language anxie y in he -
i age speake s and second language lea ne s. He a gues ha while his kind o
esea ch has impo an insigh s o o e , i also leads o an O he ing o mul ilin-
gual speake s since i p esen s he i age speake s as a homogenous g oup ha
ha e li le powe o e hei linguis ic abili ies. In con as , Bunk a gues ha he -
i age speake s a e no passi e subjec s ac ing ou o anxie y, bu a he agen s
ha ac i ely employ hei linguis ic choices. He suppo s his claim wi h an anal-
ysis o quali a i e in e iews ha shows ha he i age speake s’ emo ional e-
la ionship wi h language is o en shaped by heigh ened socie al consciousness
a he han by me e anxie y. Agains his backg ound, he ad oca es a di e en
iew o mul ilinguals in esea ch on language anxie y, one ha akes in o consid-
e a ion hei agency and he ole o socie al ideologies owa ds mul ilingualism.
The con ibu ion o Gampe e al. in Ch.6 adds a ocus on language lea ning
and eaching. They a ge O he ing in s udies on Ge man as a Second Language
(GSL) and analyse how he academic ield o GSL concep ualises i s “clien ele” o
lea ne s. They e iew a da a sample o 138 pape s on child and adolescen lea n-
e s ha we e coded acco ding o explici and implici ea u es ela ed o wha
cons i u es GSL. Thei esul s e eal GSL o be a ague and unspeci ic cons uc ,
wi h a ely any explici c i e ia o i s de ini ion. They a gue ha his is p oblem-
a ic as i migh lead o a cons uc o GSL speake s ha has no base in eali y o
may be highly biased. Agains his backg ound, hei analysis e eals pa e ns
o O he ing in hei da a based on a de ici iew o GSL speake s in pa icula
and mul ilingualism in gene al. The au ho s s ess he necessi y o signi ican ly
e ise and o e come such de icien concep s o GSL and mul ilingualism and he
O he ing ha goes wi h i , no only in academia bu also in educa ional policy de-
ba es, and p opose o limi he concep o “GSL” exclusi ely o newly immig a ed
lea ne s o Ge man.
In Ch.7, İnci Di im con inues he discussion a he in e ace o linguis ics and
didac ics, a ge ing he concep o “linguis ic iden i y”. This is a concep e-
quen ly e e ed o in s udies on language and mig a ion, no ably also in he
con ex o Ge man as a second language (see also Ch.6). She c i ically discusses
assump ions on mul ilingual child en and young people whe e languages o he
han Ge man a e conside ed o be hei “ i s languages”: o hese speake s, i is
o en claimed ha such “ i s languages” mus be alued and augh because hey
supposedly cons i u e hei “iden i y” o “linguis ic iden i y”. Di im challenges
his claim abou he supposed impo ance o a “ i s language” o iden i y bo h
as an empi ical ac and as a didac ic concep . He discussion shows ha asse -
ions abou he impo ance o a “ i s language” as cen al o “iden i y” eed in o
5
A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese
endu ing pa e ns o e hnic dema ca ions and na ionalism, a odds wi h a glob-
alised socie y ha is shaped by mig a ion.
In Ch.8, F iede ike Lüpke b ings in a pe spec i e o he Global Sou h o he
discussion o O he ing in academia. She c i ically examines Eu ocen ic lenses
ha a e s ill p e alen in cogni i e science and linguis ics and ha suppo p o-
cesses o O he ing mul ilinguals. Decons uc ing he no ion o he monolingual
Eu opean Sel , she analyses i s ole in desc ibing he non-Eu opean O he and
in compelling hem o pe cei e hemsel es h ough ex e nal lenses, hus pe pe -
ua ing colonial iewpoin s. Agains his backg ound, he pape ad oca es a e-
calib a ion o on ologies, epis emologies, and me hodologies in he desc ip ion
o mul ilingualism ac oss all se ings, in o de o no malise dynamic and luid
mul ilingualisms, in a ou o a mo e comp ehensi e unde s anding o mul ilin-
gualism wo ldwide ha is based on con i ial esea ch pa adigms.
The inal con ibu ion, in Ch.9 by Judi h Pu ka ho e , ounds o his olume
by aking an applied pe spec i e: he chap e add esses he isks o O he ing in
linguis ic ou each ac i i ies, i.e., ac i i ies designed o ans e scien i ic linguis-
ic knowledge o membe s o he public. As Pu ka ho e poin s ou , ou each
ac i i ies a e based on speci ic ideas abou hei ecipien s, no ably abou he
ecipien s’ (lack o ) pe cei ed knowledge, hei biog aphies, and hei gene al
backg ound. Such ac i i ies hence isk O he ing hei audience by po aying
and ea ing hem as lacking ce ain compe ences. Repo ing on he expe iences
wi h an ou each p ojec , she makes use o a model o audience design ha dis-
inguishes be ween di e en ypes o audiences, including add essees, audi o s,
o e hea e s, and ea esd oppe s, and p esen s i s applicabili y in ou each. She
discusses how hese g oups a e o a e no add essed in ou each ac i i ies, and
poin s ou which aspec s – including language use, echnical access and legal e-
qui emen s – need o be conside ed when designing linguis ic ou each ac i i ies
ha aim o a oid O he ing hei audience.
This olume hus uni es and showcases s udies ha shed ligh on a mul i ude
o aspec s ela ed o O he ing in linguis ics and beyond: he chap e s co e di -
e en sub ields o linguis ics and neighbou ing disciplines and demons a e how
in each o hese ields, mul ilinguals a e ea ed as de ian and po en ially p ob-
lema ic cases ha di e om he ag eed no m.
Taken oge he , he con ibu ions in his olume shed ligh on a deep- oo ed
us/ hem dis inc ion a he basis o such O he ing p ac ices ha anscends di -
e en linguis ic sub ields and socie al domains and challenges us o hink di -
e en ly abou mul ilinguals. We belie e his o be o g ea linguis ic as well as
social impo ance, gi en ha he way we concep ualise “us” s. he “O he ” is
no only a key challenge o ou esea ch p ac ices bu can also ha e a - eaching
e ec s o social cohesion.
6
1 In oduc ion: Mul ilinguals as O he s
Re e ences
A hanasopoulos, Panos. 2016. Cogni i e consequences o mul i-compe ence. In
Vi ian Cook & Wei Li (eds.), The Camb idge handbook o linguis ic mul i-
compe ence (Camb idge Handbooks in Language and Linguis ics), 355–357.
Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Cheng, Lau e a S. P., Danielle Bu gess, Na asha Ve nooij, Cecilia Solís-Ba oso,
Ashley McDe mo & Sa i h y Namboodi ipad. 2022. The p oblema ic con-
cep o na i e speake in psycholinguis ics: Replacing ague and ha m ul e -
minology wi h inclusi e and accu a e measu es. F on ie s in Psychology 12:
The no ion o he na i e speake pu o he es : Recen esea ch ad ances. Ped o
Guija o-Fuen es, C is ina Sua ez-Gomez, Mila Vulchano a, An onella So ace
& Valen in Vulchano (eds.). DOI: 10.3389/ psyg.2021.715843.
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspec s o he heo y o syn ax (Special echnical epo
o he Resea ch Labo a o y o Elec onics o he Massachuse s Ins i u e o
Technology 11). Camb idge, Mass.: The MIT P ess.
Cook, Vi ian. 2016. P emises o mul i-compe ence. In Vi ian Cook & Wei Li (eds.),
The Camb idge handbook o linguis ic mul i-compe ence (Camb idge Hand-
books in Language and Linguis ics), 1–25. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y
P ess.
de Saussu e, Fe dinand. 1916. Cou s de linguis ique géné ale. Cha les Bally & Al-
be Sechehaye (eds.). Pa is: Payo .
De in, F ed. 2015. Discou ses o o he ing. In Ka en T acy (ed.), The in e na-
ional encyclopedia o language and social in e ac ion, 1–9. Chiches e : Wiley-
Blackwell.
Deume , Ana, Anne S o ch & Nick Shephe d. 2020. Colonial and decolonial lin-
guis ics: Knowledges and epis emes. Ox o d/New Yo k: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Di im, İnci. 2016. Ich woll e nie, dass die ande en me ken, dass wi zu Hause A a-
bisch sp echen: Pe spek i en eine linguizismusk i ischen pädagogischen P o-
essionali ä on Leh e innen und Leh e n. In Me le Humm ich, Nicolle P a ,
İnci Di im & Ch is ine F ei ag (eds.), Kul u en de Bildung, 191–208. Wiesba-
den: Sp inge .
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.
Gogolin, Ing id. 2002. Linguis ic and cul u al di e si y in Eu ope: A challenge
o educa ional esea ch and p ac ice. Eu opean Educa ional Resea ch Jou nal
1(1). 123–138.
7
A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i, Ch is oph Sch oede & Heike Wiese
G osjean, F ançois. 2010. Bilingual: Li e and eali y. Camb idge: Ha a d Uni e -
si y P ess. DOI: 10.4159/9780674056459.
Gudmes ad, Aa nes, Amanda Edmonds & Thomas Me zge . 2022. Mo ing be-
yond he na i e-speake bias in he analysis o a iable gende ma king. F on-
ie s in Psychology (12). Ped o Guija o-Fuen es, C is ina Sua ez-Gomez, Mila
Vulchano a, An onella So ace & Valen in Vulchano (eds.). 11–23. DOI: 10 .
3389/ comm.2021.723496.
Jaspe s, Jü gen & Lian Malai Madsen. 2019. C i ical pe spec i es on linguis ic ixi y
and luidi y: Languagised li es (Rou ledge C i ical S udies in Mul ilingualism
19). New Yo k & London: Rou ledge Taylo & F ancis G oup.
Jespe sen, O o. 1922. Language: I s na u e, de elopmen , and o igin. New Yo k:
Hol .
Ke swill, Paul & Heike Wiese (eds.). 2022. U ban con ac dialec s and language
change: Insigh s om he Global No h and Sou h (Rou ledge S udies in Lan-
guage Change). New Yo k & London: Rou ledge Taylo & F ancis G oup.
Lamon , Michèle & Vi ág Molná . 2002. The s udy o bounda ies in he social
sciences. Annual Re iew o Sociology 28(1). 167–195. DOI: 10.1146/annu e .soc.
28.110601.141107.
Li, Wei. 2016. Epilogue: Mul i-compe ence and he anslanguaging ins inc . In
Vi ian Cook & Wei Li (eds.), The Camb idge handbook o linguis ic mul i-
compe ence (Camb idge Handbooks in Language and Linguis ics), 533–543.
Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107425965.026.
O’Rou ke, Be nade e & Joan Pujola . 2015. New speake s and p ocesses o new
speake ness ac oss ime and space. Applied Linguis ics Re iew 6(2). 145–150.
DOI: 10.1515/appli e -2015-0007.
O ega, Lou des. 2009. Unde s anding second language acquisi ion. London: Hod-
de Educa ion.
Pennycook, Alas ai . 2016. Mobile imes, mobile e ms: The ans-supe -poly-
me o mo emen . In Nicolas Coupland (ed.), Sociolinguis ics. Theo e ical de-
ba es, 201–216. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Ramp on, Ben. 2010. F om “mul i-e hnic adolescen he e oglossia” o “con em-
po a y u ban e nacula s”. Language & Communica ion 31(4). 276–294. DOI:
10.1016/j.langcom.2011.01.001.
Rash, Felici y & Ge aldine Ho an. 2020. Discou se o B i ish and Ge man colonial-
ism: Con e gence and compe i ion (Empi es in Pe spec i e). London: Rou ledge.
Rosa, Jona han & Nelson Flo es. 2017. Unse ling ace and language: Towa d a
aciolinguis ic pe spec i e. Language in Socie y 46(5). 621–647. DOI: 10.1017/
S0047404517000562.
8
1 In oduc ion: Mul ilinguals as O he s
Ro hman, Jason, Fa ih Bay am, Vincen DeLuca, G azia Di Pisa, Jon Andoni
Duñabei ia, Khadij Gha ibi, Jiuzhou Hao, Nadine Kolb, Maki Kubo a, Tanja
Kupisch, Tim Lamé is, Alicia Luque, B echje an Osch, Se gio Miguel Pe ei a
Soa es, Yanina P ys auka, Deniz Ta , Aleksand a Tomić, Toms Voi s & S e anie
Wul . 2023. Monolingual compa a i e no ma i i y in bilingualism esea ch is
ou o “con ol”: A gumen s and al e na i es. Applied Psycholinguis ics 44(3).
316–329. DOI: 10.1017/S0142716422000315.
Shad o a, Anna, Pia Linscheid, Julia Lukassek, Anke Lüdeling & Sa ah Schneide .
2021. A Challenge o con as i e L1/L2 co pus s udies: La ge in e - and in a-
indi idual a ia ion ac oss mo phological, bu no global syn ac ic ca ego ies
in ask-based co pus da a o a homogeneous L1 Ge man g oup. F on ie s in
psychology 12. 165–193. DOI: 10.3389/ psyg.2021.716485.
Tsehaye, Win ai, Ta iana Pashko a, Rosema ie T acy & Shanley E. Allen. 2022.
Decons uc ing he na i e speake : Fu he e idence om he i age speak-
e s o why his ho se should be dead! F on ie s in Psychology 12. Ped o
Guija o-Fuen es, C is ina Sua ez-Gomez, Mila Vulchano a, An onella So ace
& Valen in Vulchano (eds.). 67–80. DOI: 10.3389/ psyg.2021.717352.
Wa nke, Ingo. 2019. Th ee s eps in ch oma ic abysses: On he necessi y o e-
sea ching colonialism in la e linguis ics. Jou nal o Pos colonial Linguis ics 1.
41–59.
Weisge be , Leo Johann. 1966. Vo eile und Ge ah en de Zweisp achigkei . Wi k-
endes Wo 16. 73–89.
Wiese, Heike. 2013. Wha can new u ban dialec s ell us abou in e nal language
dynamics? The powe o language di e si y. In We ne Ab aham & Elisabe h
Leiss (eds.), Dialek ologie in neuem Gewand (Linguis ische Be ich e - Sonde -
he e), 208–245. Hambu g: Helmu Buske Ve lag.
Wiese, Heike, A emis Alexiadou, Shanley Allen, Oli e Bunk, Na alia Gaga-
ina, Ka e yna Ie emenko, Ma ia Ma yno a, Ta iana Pashko a, Vicky Ri-
zou, Ch is oph Sch oede , Anna Shad o a, Luka Szucsich, Rosema ie T acy,
Win ai Tsehaye, Sabine Ze bian & Yulia Zuban. 2021. He i age speake s as
pa o he na i e language con inuum. F on ie s in Psychology 12. Ped o
Guija o-Fuen es, C is ina Sua ez-Gomez, Mila Vulchano a, An onella So ace
& Valen in Vulchano (eds.). 209–227. DOI: 10.3389/ psyg.2021.717973.
Wiese, Heike, A emis Alexiadou, Claudio Sca aglie i & Ch is oph Sch oede .
2022. Mul ilinguals as O he s in socie y and academia: Challenges o belong-
ing unde a monolingual habi us. Wo king Pape s in U ban Language & Li e a-
cies 302. h ps://wpull.o g/wp-con en /uploads/2022/10/WP302-Wiese-e -al-
2022-Mul ilinguals-as-o he s.pd .
9
