Bør vi holde oss med norsk som pedagogisk fagspråk? I denne teksten skrives det frem noen mulige svar på dette spørsmålet. Men hvis ikke norsk, så engelsk? Svar på om, og hvorvidt, engelsk er å foretrekke som pedagogisk fagspråk, vurderes også i teksten som følger. Teksten er eller representerer en tankegang, det vil si en utvidet refleksjon, når det gjelder språkformen til norske pedagoger. Hovedspørsmålet som stilles, er: Hvorfor det ene – og hvorfor (ikke) det andre? Det fremkommer ikke så mange resultater (eller funn) i teksten; den er snarere en invitasjon til å tenke med, eller mot, noen av de oppfatninger som presenteres.
The purpose of this article is to examine the position of English, neighbor languages and the teaching of neighbor languages in the different levels of education. Also, the intention is to find out what status the neighbor languages and English have in research and teaching. To describe the co-existence of English and the Scandinavian languages, the article starts out by explaining the concepts of ‘parallel languages’ and ‘linguistic domain/domain loss’. In the continuation one finds chapters on the use of English and the Scandinavian languages in research and teaching. The article ends with a review on the teaching of neighbor languages in the primary and secondary schools. The main conclusion is that English has become the most important language in the publication of peer-reviewed research literature. However, the national languages still have an important role to play on different levels in the research process. Since the internationalization and globalization of the universities in the 1990s English has also become much more visible in university teaching. The number of international students has increased quite a bit which has prompted more courses and fields of study in English. As a counterpoise to this development the politicians in Denmark have sat a ceiling for the numbers of international students at the universities of Denmark. This resulted in a ‘de-internationalization’ and development of a specific language policy on the universities, where focus is especially on the use of parallel languages. In the Nordic region, the Scandinavian languages (Danish, Norwegian and Swedish) are understood as natural neighbor languages. In generations people from these countries have been able to understand each other using their own tongue. Today, it looks like it is not the case though the neighboring languages are taught as a mandatory subject in all three countries. On the contrary, it seems as if English is used as an important auxiliary language at the expense of the Scandinavian languages.
In this article one finds a short introduction to the articles in this special volume. In the continuation of the article is about important priorities made during the last 60-70 years implementing English as a lingua franca. With reference to the theory of Pierre Bourdieu about language as a symbolic power, one can understand the English language as a powerful language in the academic world. Especially when it comes to publication of peer reviewed materials as English today is the most preferred publication language. This fact raises a question about the quality of the text, as Scandinavian academics do not learn English as a mother tongue but as a foreign language. Writing an English text in an academic language does make it difficult for many Scandinavian academics. Today, one might find a solution to this by using new technology, e.g. digital translation programs and artificial intelligence. However, one must ascertain that by enforcing such digital solutions the foundation for text production, translation and teaching is changing fiercely. A situation that is challenging for both researchers and teachers. The last part of the article is about neighbor languages in the Scandinavian region and the necessity of developing a parallel language understanding both when using the Scandinavian languages and when using English.
An increasingly smaller proportion of scientific publications written by Norwegian researchers are published in Norwegian. In this essay, the authors argue that this is a problem – both for the Norwegian language and for research itself. They also claim that using, developing, and thereby preserving Norwegian as a research language has an intrinsic value that far outweighs the potential benefit of reaching a larger audience through English-language publishing. The argument rests on the idea that research and dissemination are two sides of the same coin, and that language and thought are inseparable: Without a language the researcher masters well, thought becomes hesitant and imprecise. According to the authors, both the subject matter and the context are decisive for which language is most suitable and for the text’s ability to reach interested and critical readers. The premise that English-language publications always reach a larger international audience is not taken for granted. When research addresses welfare arrangements that are locally rooted and politically enacted, the opposite may be true. The value of scientific texts having literary qualities is an additional argument for why researchers, whose mother tongue is Norwegian should publish research in Norwegian – not only in English.
This article explores how school leaders work to develop inclusive practices in a Norwegian municipality. Based on interviews and observations, the study uses a qualitative design and reflexive thematic analysis. Findings show that school leaders play a key role in creating a shared culture for inclusion through reflection, collective values, and professional collaboration. The study highlights tensions between policy and practice and shows how leaders may support inclusive education through cultural and structural initiatives.
