De-naturalizing Language Use in Migration and Diversity Research: A Critical Multilingual and Non-Language-Centered Approach

Language, far from being a mere tool for communication, is a potent signifier of social distinctions, reflecting an individual’s class, cultural background, regional origins, and educational experiences. For scholars engaged in migration studies, a profound sensitivity to these social markers embedded within linguistic practices is not just beneficial but essential. Such awareness is crucial because these distinctions deeply shape both the ontologies—our understanding of being—and the epistemologies—our understanding of knowledge—of individuals and communities. This nuanced appreciation of language use contributes to the vital process of de-naturalizing language. It challenges the perception of language as an objective, timeless system or code, while simultaneously acknowledging its intrinsic link to the nation-state. The formalization of languages has historically been intertwined with nation-building processes, and named languages cannot be easily detached from the sociopolitical and socioeconomic trajectories of their respective countries or regions.

This scholarly contribution delves into the critical task of de-naturalizing languages within the field of migration studies, with a particular focus on the practicalities of conducting empirical research in multilingual settings. In such environments, inherent language hierarchies can significantly influence the positionalities of both researchers and those being researched. The author advocates for a synergistic approach, pairing translanguaging methodology with critical language awareness in the conduct of research and the subsequent production of knowledge. The paper proposes methodological solutions derived from empirical research, emphasizing a flexible research design, a multimethod outline, the collection of diverse data, a mindful approach to language, and extensive visualization of findings. Ultimately, it offers a critical multilingual research framework intended to equip migration and diversity scholars with the tools to navigate their complex research landscapes more effectively.

The Interplay of Language, Power, and Research

The article, authored by Tetiana Havlin, a sociologist and visiting professor at Brandenburg University of Technology, argues that traditional approaches to language in social science research often fall into a trap of treating languages as fixed, bounded entities. This perspective, rooted in a nation-state paradigm, overlooks the fluid and dynamic ways individuals actually use their linguistic repertoires. Havlin points to foundational linguistic theories, such as Ferdinand de Saussure’s structural linguistics, which, while groundbreaking, laid groundwork for viewing language as a system separate from its users and social contexts. This perspective, she argues, can inadvertently reinforce existing power structures by privileging certain linguistic norms—often those associated with dominant national languages—while marginalizing others.

The author draws on scholars like Pierre Bourdieu and Basil Bernstein, whose work highlights how language is intrinsically linked to social class and power. Bourdieu’s concept of "symbolic power" underscores how language can be used to legitimize social hierarchies and create distinctions, while Bernstein’s theory of "codes" illustrates how different linguistic patterns are associated with different social classes, influencing educational outcomes and social mobility. By de-naturalizing language, researchers can begin to understand how these sociolinguistic dynamics shape the lived experiences of migrants and diverse populations.

Historical Context: Language and the Nation-State

The intertwining of language and nation-building is a historical phenomenon that has profound implications for contemporary research. Following the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, the concept of the sovereign nation-state gained prominence, and the promotion of a single, standardized national language became a cornerstone of state consolidation and identity formation. This process often involved the suppression or marginalization of minority languages and dialects, creating linguistic hierarchies that persist to this day.

During the 19th and 20th centuries, this trend intensified with the rise of mass education systems, which were often designed to instill a shared national language and culture. This created what Ingrid Gogolin terms a "monolingual habitus" within educational institutions, where multilingualism was often viewed as a deficit rather than a resource. The enduring legacy of this historical trajectory means that research conducted within existing national frameworks can inadvertently perpetuate these linguistic biases. As scholars like Anna Amelina and Thomas Faist have argued in their work on de-naturalizing the national in research methodologies, it is crucial to move beyond these ingrained assumptions to conduct more inclusive and accurate research on migration.

The Rise of Translanguaging and Critical Language Awareness

In response to these challenges, Havlin champions the concept of "translanguaging." Coined and popularized by scholars like Ofelia García and Li Wei, translanguaging refers to the dynamic and flexible use of a speaker’s entire linguistic repertoire, drawing on multiple languages and dialects in an integrated way. It moves beyond the traditional notion of separate named languages, recognizing that multilingual individuals often fluidly switch between and combine linguistic resources in ways that defy strict linguistic boundaries.

Translanguaging methodology, as advocated by Havlin, involves researchers actively acknowledging and incorporating the full linguistic repertoires of participants. This means not imposing a single "research language" or rigidly categorizing speakers into discrete linguistic groups. Instead, it encourages researchers to be "language mindful," observing and analyzing how participants naturally employ their linguistic resources to construct meaning and navigate their social worlds. This approach is complemented by "critical language awareness," a concept championed by Ofelia García, which involves a deep understanding of how language is implicated in social power relations, ideologies, and inequalities.

Methodological Innovations for Multilingual Research

Havlin proposes several concrete methodological solutions for researchers working in multilingual contexts:

• Flexible Research Design: Moving away from rigid, pre-defined research plans to accommodate the emergent and fluid nature of language use in multilingual encounters. This involves being open to unexpected linguistic phenomena and adapting research questions and methods as needed.
• Multimethod Outline: Employing a diverse range of research methods, such as qualitative interviews, focus groups, discourse analysis, and visual methods, to capture the multifaceted nature of linguistic practices. This allows for triangulation of data and a richer understanding of the phenomena under investigation.
• Plurality of Acquired Data: Recognizing that data can be collected in various linguistic forms, including spoken interactions, written texts, visual materials, and even non-verbal communication. The goal is to capture the entirety of the communicative act, not just its translated or standardized form.
• Language Mindfulness: Cultivating a heightened awareness of language as a social practice. This involves paying close attention to not only what is said but also how it is said, including intonation, dialect, code-switching, and the use of linguistic resources from different named languages. Researchers must be conscious of their own linguistic biases and assumptions.
• Extensive Visualization of Findings: Employing visual aids, such as linguistic maps, sociolinguistic diagrams, and multimodal representations, to illustrate the complexity of language use and its social implications. This can make intricate linguistic patterns more accessible and understandable to both academic audiences and the wider public.

Empirical Examples and Case Studies

While the article abstract does not detail specific empirical examples, it references Havlin’s own prior work on immigrant agency and gender roles, as well as her reflections on multilingualism and translanguaging in migration studies. These previous publications likely inform her current proposals, suggesting a grounding in real-world research challenges. For instance, research conducted by Clara Holzinger and her colleagues (2026) on qualitative interview research in multilingual contexts, and by Marie Jacobs and Ella van Hest (2025) on "spaces of linguistic non-understanding," underscore the practical difficulties and epistemological challenges that arise when conducting research across linguistic divides. These studies highlight the necessity of the very de-naturalizing approaches that Havlin advocates.

The Broader Impact and Implications

The implications of Havlin’s work extend beyond the academic realm of migration studies. By promoting a critical multilingual and non-language-centered approach, she challenges the broader societal tendency to view languages as discrete, national entities. This has implications for:

• Education: Rethinking language education policies to embrace the linguistic diversity of students and recognize translanguaging as a valuable pedagogical tool.
• Policy Making: Informing policies related to immigration, integration, and intercultural communication to be more sensitive to the linguistic realities of diverse populations.
• Social Cohesion: Fostering greater understanding and empathy between different linguistic and cultural groups by challenging linguistic prejudices and promoting a more inclusive view of communication.
• Knowledge Production: Encouraging a more equitable and representative production of knowledge by giving voice to the linguistic practices and perspectives of marginalized communities.

In conclusion, Tetiana Havlin’s contribution offers a vital reorientation for migration and diversity scholars. By advocating for the de-naturalization of language through translanguaging methodology and critical language awareness, she provides a framework for conducting more ethical, rigorous, and socially relevant research. This approach not only enriches our understanding of the complexities of human migration but also contributes to a broader societal shift towards recognizing and valuing linguistic diversity as a fundamental aspect of human experience and social life. The proposed methodological tools and conceptual framework aim to empower researchers to navigate the intricate linguistic landscapes of multilingual encounters, ensuring that the richness of human communication is fully acknowledged and analytically embraced.