The ‘burden’ of emotions in language teaching: negotiating a troubled past in ‘other’-language learning classrooms

Abstract

This paper focuses on language classes where Greek-Cypriot students learn Turkish as their second Modern Foreign Language (MFL). Literature on MFL learning and emotions tends to focus on learners' emotions in relation to the production of the new language; however, MFL learning is also a space that provides the opportunity to language learners to construct different emotional experiences and negotiate different identities and different emotional stances towards their own or the target community and culture. What happens, though, when the language to be learnt is associated with a history of conflict and the dominant educational discourses construct emotional stances that perpetuate animosity towards the target community? And in this context, to what extent can language learning provide an opportunity to renegotiate a troubled past? Approaching emotions as socio-political discursive constructs, this paper examines classroom interaction during 32 h of Turkish language learning. It analyses (1) the students' emotional resistance towards a positive representation of the ‘Others’; (2) the teacher's discomfort in adopting a positive stance towards the Turkish-speaking people; (3) the impact these two had on the lesson and classroom interaction.

To παρόν άρθρo εξετάζει γλωσσικά µαθήµατα κατά τα oπoία Eλληνoκύπριoι µαθητές διδάσκoνταν την Toυρκική ως δεύτερη ξένη γλώσσα. H διεθνής βιβλιoγραϕία σχετικά µε τo ρόλo των συναισθηµάτων στην εκµάθηση ξένων γλωσσών τείνει να επικεντρώνεται στα συναισθήµατα των σπoυδαστών όσoν αϕoρά τη γραπτή ή την πρoϕoρική παραγωγή της νέας γλώσσας. Ωστόσo, η διαδικασία εκµάθησης µιας ξένης γλώσσας παρέχει τη δυνατότητα στoυς σπoυδαστές ξένων γλωσσών να κατασκευάσoυν διαϕoρετικές συναισθηµατικές εµπειρίες, και να διαπραγµατευτoύν διαϕoρετικές ταυτότητες και διαϕoρετικές συναισθηµατικές στάσεις, τόσo για τη δική τoυς κoινότητα όσo και για την κoινότητα-στόχo και τoν πoλιτισµό της. Tι συµβαίνει όµως όταν η διδακτέα γλώσσα συνδέεται µε µια ιστoρία βίαιων συγκρoύσεων και oι κυρίαρχoι εκπαιδευτικoί λόγoι κατασκευάζoυν συναισθηµατικές στάσεις πoυ διαιωνίζoυν την έχθρα πρoς την κoινότητα-στόχo; Kαι σε πoιo βαθµό µπoρεί η εκµάθηση µιας γλώσσας, στo πλαίσιo αυτό, να δώσει την ευκαιρία για πιθανή επαναδιαπραγµάτευση ενός πρoβληµατικoύ παρελθόντoς; Eξετάζoντας τα συναισθήµατα ως κoινωνικo-πoλιτικά γλωσσικά κατασκευάσµατα, τo άρθρo αυτό εξετάζει τη συνoµιλιακή αλληλεπίδραση µέσα στην τάξη κατά τη διάρκεια 32 ωρών µαθηµάτων Toυρκικής γλώσσας. Συγκεκριµένα αναλύει, (α) τη συναισθηµατική αντίσταση των µαθητών ως πρoς µια θετική αναπαράσταση τoυ «Άλλoυ», β) τη δυσκoλία τoυ καθηγητή στην υιoθέτηση µιας θετικής στάσης έναντι των oµιλητών της Toυρκικής, και γ) τoν αντίκτυπo αυτών των δύo στo µάθηµα και την αλληλεπίδραση µέσα στην τάξη.

Keywords:

• emotion discourses
• politics
• conflict
• language education
• peace

Notes on contributor

Dr Constadina Charalambous is a Lecturer in Language Education & Literacy at the European University of Cyprus. Her research interests include interactional sociolinguistics, peace education and language learning in contexts of conflict. She has conducted research on peace education initiatives in Cyprus and has been involved in teacher-training seminars. At the moment she is conducting a Leverhulme Trust funded research project on Other-language learning classes in Cyprus investigating the role of language learning in promoting peaceful coexistence.

Notes

1. In April 2004, Cypriot people had for the first time the chance to vote in a public referendum in support or against the so-called ‘Annan Plan’ for the resolution of the political problem.

2. An alternative discourse also exists, coming mainly from leftist circles. This discourse draws on common class struggles and, therefore, emphasises the common Cypriot identity of all Cypriot communities. Although some scholars argue that the division between rightist discourses focusing on Greek-Cypriots’ Greekness and leftist discourses arguing for shared ‘Cypriotness’ has changed after the 2004 referendum for the Cyprus Issue resolution (Vural & Peristianis, 2008), there is an evidence that this antithetical framework is still powerful as it politicises the different stances to the conflict and the neighbouring community (see Charalambous, 2012; Charalambous, Charalambous, & Zembylas, 2013).

3. The announcement can be found at http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/All/745A5D6134331502C2256D9F00338D9A?OpenDocument.

4. The project was part of my doctoral research at King's College London, funded by the School of Social Sciences and Public Policy.

5. The detailed analysis of the adult data is part of a new project that runs from 2012 to 2015 and is funded by the Leverhulme Trust.

6. I am using the term ‘Others’ as during the narrative Mr A never specified whether he was talking about Turkish-Cypriots or Turks. As a matter of fact the category ‘Others’ was constructed in opposition to ‘us’.

7. TV reality show at the time, with Greeks and Turks as the two rival teams.

8. ‘Hypothetical scenarios’ have been identified to be functioning as arguments in Modern Greek conversations/disagreements (see Georgakopoulou, 2001; Kakava, 2002).

9. Neither the place of the encounters, nor the people he refers to are labelled so it remains unclear whether Mr A is talking about Turks or Turkish-Cypriots.

10. This formulation of lines 3–5, resembles what Pomerantz (1986) calls an ‘extreme case formulation’ (ECF). According to Pomerantz, ECFs are used as a rhetorical strategy for legitimising a claim and in particular for (1) defending a claim against challenges, (2) introducing a claim or phenomenon as ‘objective rather than a product of the interaction or the circumstances’ (Pomerantz, 1986, p. 220) and (3) presenting a behaviour or practice as right ‘by virtue of its status as frequently occurring or commonly done’ (Pomerantz, 1986).

11. Mr A thought that Standard Greek was a more appropriate variety for a teacher to use, since in his opinion, it made the speaker sound ‘educated’ (Interview, 20/12/2006). From my observations, it appeared that he normally used the Standard Greek forms and, in general, he tried to avoid dialectical words/expressions especially when he was in the classroom – even for words that are not used in that form in Cyprus (for example, once he used the word ‘στυλó’ ([stilo] pen) and the students reminded him that ‘Sir no one in Cyprus says this. We say “πένα”’ ([pena] pen). Fieldnotes, 2/11/2006). Also in this extract, in line 10, for example, he uses the Standard-Greek negative form δεν ([then] ‘not’) and avoids the most commonly used dialectical negative form εν [en]).

12. Rizokarpaso is a village in North-East edge of Cyprus. A small community of Greek Cypriots has remained there after 1974, and they are known as ‘the enclaved’. The teacher of the story was sent there by the government to teach the Greek Cypriot children who live there.

13. According to Labov (2007, p. 407), ‘The credibility of a narrative is the extent to which listeners believe that the events described occurred in the form described by the narrator’.

14. E.g. for Turkish-Cypriots it was a ‘Peace Operation’ (Papadakis, 2005).

15. Mr A never said, ‘they are polite’. The only general declarative assertion he articulated was ‘there is total respect’. The rest of his formulations regarding the Others i.e., ‘they will respect you’, ‘they invite her’ concerned hypothetical scenarios or the story.