Plurilingual and Pluricultural Practices in Turkish Study Abroad: The Intersection of Identity and Lx Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas second language acquisition has embraced the multilingual turn, study abroad (SA) research often assumes that learners are situated in monolingual host societies. As the profile and preferences of the sojourner diversifies, destination sites become more cosmopolitan, and global migration patterns change the demographic makeup of communities, traditional models are no longer representative of SA. This article presents the plurilingual experiences of learners of Turkish abroad. Through analysis of weekly journals, plurilingual practice is examined as a potential resource and constraint. Findings confirm how plurilingual practice supports mutual understanding and translanguaging between participants’ L1 English and Turkish. Results also reveal how shared minority identity can support TL interaction more than seeking out “native speakers.” This study offers a unique contribution to the link between identity and language learning in SA, providing further support for the need to dismantle the preeminence of the “native speaker” as target interlocutor in study abroad.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".