Translanguaging drama: embracing learners’ <i>perezhivanie</i> for embodiment of the repertoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The creative and dynamic practices that multilinguals perform with linguistic and non-linguistic features such as the body, movement, senses, and space have been documented as integral to their repertoire. Drawing on interdisciplinary literature, this article advances the concept of the repertoire through translanguaging drama as a pedagogical practice and examines the resources that can be volitionally mobilised through language learners’ perezhivanie, or the emotional, felt and lived through experience. Translanguaging drama was implemented in two English language programmes with adult learners in Canada. While these courses focused on improving English language skills, translanguaging drama was implemented to activate learners’ perezhivanie while using their repertoire, which not only facilitated communication in the English language but pushed for agency in using non-linguistic resources. I examine learners’ perezhivanie with a subset of data, which included observation notes and learner diary entries. In this article, I emphasize four main interrelated areas: (1) volition and empowerment, (2) meaning-making across languages, (3) embodiment of language – through voice modulation, facial expression, and body language–, and (4) language choice triggered by perezhivanie. Implications of the study for furthering the theorisation of language, language learning and the repertoire are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".