Being and Becoming a Plurilingual Academic: A new book in the making

I have spent most of my academic life speaking, writing and thinking in a language that was¹ not my own: my doctoral research, most of my publications, and this blog are all in English. This is so normal in our field that it barely registers as a choice, and that is — I believe — the problem. We like to think of our professional world as international, and this is in many respects true. But this internationalisation comes with a less examined corollary, namely that academia conducts more and more of its business in a single language.

This paradox, a higher education landscape that is simultaneously more international and more monolingual than ever, is the starting point for a new book that Richard Fay and I are editing. The volume, Being and Becoming a Plurilingual Academic in an English-Dominated World² is part of Multilingual Matters’ Researching Multilingually series. Set to appear in 2028, it brings together colleagues writing from Bangladesh, Uganda, Qatar, Belarus (by way of Manchester), Greece, and the shifting terrain of the European university alliances. Collectively, we ask what it means to build an academic identity when one’s authority as a ‘knower’ often rests on one’s relationship with English.

Whether you work in English, another language, or somewhere between the two, I hope the discussion that follows will give you something to think about.

---

Why we wrote this book

In this volume, we discuss multiple aspects of academic being and becoming in the context of English language hegemony (i.e., the normalisation of English as the default, to the point where using it no longer feels like a choice). ‘Being an academic’ has multiple facets, including our teaching and supervision roles, conducting research and publishing, as well as more core aspects of identity.

Synthesising these multiple ways of being an academic is even more challenging because of the hegemonic presence of English across the communities to which academics belong. In teaching, for instance, English is increasingly displacing local languages in the form of English Medium Instruction. The growing interest in community languages, plurilingualism and linguistic superdiversity has placed demands on the linguistic repertoires of researchers; but these are hard to reconcile with strong pressures to disseminate the findings of such research in English. The combined effect of such developments is that academics’ identity as ‘knowers’ is often dependent on their readiness to invest in English as a lingua academica.

Our aim, in the volume, is to elucidate some aspects of becoming and being an academic in a plurilingual Higher Education landscape where English plays an increasingly salient role. We expect the volume to bring to the fore and critically examine questions of epistemic (in)justice, as well as the social, psychological, and academic complexities of developing hybrid linguistic identities. The volume will also suggest ways in which one might challenge such inequitable structures.

Plurilingualism, epistemic injustice, and academic identity

Some of the themes that the book aims to raise, in relation to the linguistic structure of Higher Education, are the following:

1. Throughout the chapters, the authors describe academic becoming as a process of linguistic and political identity negotiation that extends beyond strictly cognitive and professional dimensions. We view this negotiation as a situated process, shaped by different constellations of influences, from monolingual pedagogical traditions to neoliberal pressures, and from post-colonial concerns to practical expediency.
2. Another recurring theme across the book is what Miranda Fricker³ described as epistemic injustice. The contributions that make up the book explore this from various perspectives that –we believe– mutually reinforce each other. Some of these perspectives view epistemic injustice as a series of structural constraints that delegitimise local knowledge practices; others as tension between local practitioner-based knowledge production and North-to-South epistemic flows; others still as critical awareness of how “surface markers” of multilingualism, like local accents, position academics at epistemic disadvantage.
3. Collectively, the chapters resist deficit framings of non-English linguistic repertoires. Throughout the book, the authors recast, and value, such linguistic difference variously as intellectual capital, practical and theoretical resources, and methodological lenses.

What each chapter contributes to the study of academic plurilingualism

The book consists of eight chapters by colleagues in three different continents, and there are also two editorial contributions framing the collection.

The plurilingual academic in an English-dominated world: Setting the scene

This introductory chapter, by Achilleas Kostoulas and Richard Fay, frames the collection by raising awareness of a central paradox in the current academic scene: while higher education is increasingly internationalised, it is simultaneously becoming more monolingual in practice, due to the hegemonic pressures of English instruction and scholarly communication. The chapter connects the volume to key contributions in critical scholarship, such as linguistic imperialism and epistemic injustice, and traces themes across authorial contributions from the Global South, postcolonial and post-Soviet polities, the Gulf,⁴ and European supranational policy contexts. In the introduction, we direct the readers’ attention to dimensions of academic life where linguistic hierarchies will appear in the chapters, including (a) teaching and supervision, (b) research and publication, and (c) identity formation and negotiation. This introductory chapter concludes by positioning plurilingual academic identities as an epistemic resource and potential site of resistance.

Deficit and asset framings of multilingualism in academic identity negotiation

In the first substantive chapter of the book, Felix Kwihangana reflexively examines how multilingual academics construct and negotiate their identities within an English‑speaking higher education environment. Felix uses Positioning Theory and vignettes from his own academic trajectory to showcase deficit and asset framings of multilingualism and the way they influence self-positioning with respect to academic rights, duties and claims to epistemic authority. The chapter problematises how ‘surface markers’ of multilingualism, such as non-native accents, frame multilingualism as a barrier to epistemic legitimacy; and it contrasts these with asset framings that allow multilingual academics to claim more favourable academic positionings.

Epistemic injustices of academics in the Global South context of Bangladesh

In the next chapter, Anjuman Ara explores what languages academics in Bangladesh use when teaching and supervising their students and publishing their research, how they combat the symbolic power, and how their academic identity is divided, negotiated and shaped. This chapter aims to use Critical Discourse Analysis to examine the epistemic injustices that university teachers from different disciplines experience because of the (required) medium of instruction, supervision, and publishing; it also explores their language ideologies and strategies to overcome the inequalities. Ultimately, this study aims to reveal the persistent English-based linguistic coloniality and injustices in the Global South and unfold practical techniques of reducing inequities from academics’ viewpoints.

Reflections of navigating English, Cantonese and Mandarin identities in teaching and research in England

Choen Yin (Helen) Chan’s chapter provides an auto-ethnographic, narrative reflection on being a plurilingual academic in England. It explores how Helen transitions between English, Cantonese and Mandarin and between academic and non-academic spaces, and offers insights into how she negotiates her identity and position through these transitions. Using reflexive analysis of vignettes drawn from her experiences of teaching Chinese international students, conducting research interviews, and networking with local communities, Helen explores perceived insider/outsider positions, and discusses how she purposefully uses native-sounding language to build rapport with different groups of people. Through these examples, she consistently highlights how plurilingual academics can shift between linguistic identities to shape professional and interpersonal relationships. 

Coloniality of language and epistemic injustice in global mental health

The next chapter, by Rosco Kasujja, is set in the Higher Education of Uganda. This unique multilingual environment has been shaped by missionary education, British colonial rule, and global academic systems, which create linguistic imbalances between English, the language of higher education, research, publishing, and international recognition on the one hand, and –on the other– Luganda and other indigenous languages, which sit at the core of daily life and clinical practice. Rosco notes that global mental health frameworks often marginalise local experience and reinforce linguistic hierarchies. Against this backdrop, plurilingualism is framed as an epistemic resource and a form of resistance. By demonstrating how Ugandan clinical practice generates theory instead of merely adapting to external models, Rosco challenge the dominance of English and the one-way flow of knowledge from North to South.

Тутэйшыя (localised) perspectives of knowing in a polarising world

Elena Barabantseva’s chapter draws on the early 20th-century Belarusian classic Yanka Kupala and her notion of тутэйшыя (tuteyshyya, ‘locals’) to convey the adaptable and shifting allegiances of Belarusians between the Russian and Polish states at the time. In this chapter, тутэйшыя serves as a metaphor for thinking about the codes and strategies through which minority groups navigate dominant languages and centres of power (English, Russian, Chinese) from the periphery. Elena asks what it means to bring a localised perspective into research, teaching, and broader ways of thinking, and uses тутэйшыя as a methodological and conceptual lens for answering it by reflecting on her research and teaching on globalising China’s politics of ethnicity, migration, citizenship, and the negotiation of identities.

Less widely taught languages on the multilingual chessboard of European university alliances

Freiderikos Valetopoulos and Anamaria Gheorghiu Grecu’s chapter draws attention to the concept of forced bilingualism, which they define as the mandatory use of English alongside the national language of instruction. Their chapter examines two aspects of multilingualism policies in European University Alliances. One is the extent to which such policies integrate less widely taught languages; the other focuses on the tools that operationalise such policies. To address these questions, they draw on an analysis of official Alliance documents and webpages as well as data from a student questionnaire that investigated understandings of multilingualism, perceptions of policy implementation, and attitudes toward less widely taught languages.

Multilingual harmony

The next chapter of the collection is a narrative reflection by Magdalena Rostron, which explores plurilingual academic experiences in Georgetown University-Qatar. The aim of the chapter is to take a “road less travelled” in its approach to the function of English in contemporary non-Western academic settings. In doing so, it seeks to demonstrate the power of this global language to connect people and cultures, while critically interrogating the conventional urge to “decolonise” English-language education. The chapter acknowledges the richness and multitude of backgrounds present in the setting, while recognising nuanced views of English and its less-than-straightforward position in different cultures and societies. However, its main purpose is to highlight the less-than-acknowledged role of English as part of “that power […] that eternally works good”,⁵ enabling engagement with each other and the world at large.

Navigating monolingualism and plurilingualism in a Department of French Language and Literature

The last substantive chapter in the collection is authored by Marie-Christine Anastassiadi, Marina Vihou & Kanellina Menouti from the University of Athens Department of French Language and Literature. In this contribution, the authors problematise persistent monolingual ideologies within institutions and discrepancies between official language policies and classroom practices. Using the department as a case study, the authors draw attention to the paradoxical co-existence, in the same institutional context, of outward-looking, plurilingual research practices and inward-oriented, monolingual pedagogical traditions.

Beyond the paradox: Plurilingualism, justice, and ways forward

We (Richard and I) conclude the volume by synthesising the various themes that run across the chapters. In our concluding chapter, we problematise the linguistic structure of contemporary higher education, and articulate proposals for more linguistically just ways of managing plurilingualism in the academic world. We distinguish the kind of formal plurilingualism that exists in policies, mandates, and stated commitments and substantive plurilingualism, as manifested in actual practice, institutional support, and curriculum integration. This leads to open questions such as how to achieve institutional change in language policy; what pedagogical models can best support plurilingual academic becoming; and how Higher Education might operationalise epistemic justice frameworks in practice. The chapter concludes by positioning plurilingual academic identities as an epistemic resource and potential site of resistance.

Conclusion

Editing a collection like this is, inevitably, an exercise in the very phenomenon it describes. Richard and I have been reading chapters written in English by colleagues for whom, as for me, English is often a professional acquisition rather than an inheritance, about the costs and possibilities of exactly that arrangement. There is an irony there that we do not try to escape in the book, and I will not try to escape it here. What the volume argues, in the end, is not the displacement of English from academic life; rather, it’s a reminder that the linguistic repertoires academics bring with them are a resource the academy can ill afford to keep treating as noise.

The manuscript is due with the publisher in 2027. I expect to return to some of its themes here as the work develops; and, as ever, I am keen on hearing how these questions play out in your own corner of the academy.

Notes

1. Choosing the right tense proved something of a challenge. Why should English not be my own language? If anything, I think I am more comfortable in English most of the time than I am in Modern Greek; but then again, I am often more comfortable working than doing anything else. ↩︎
2. This is, of course, a working title. I am still toying with ways to cleverly combine being and becoming (Be.com.ing?), which are often too clever for their own good. And then there’s the question of how much we want to foreground the ‘English-dominated’ aspect. You can expect that phrase to disappear and reappear in the title with some regularity over the next few months until I make up my mind or Richard loses his patience with me. ↩︎
3. Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press. ↩︎
4. I am aware that there are different preferences about how to name this part of the world. I have little patience for such debates. ↩︎
5. As a reminder, this is an allusion to Mephisopheles’ self-description: a force that always strives for evil and somehow always brings about good (“Ich bin ein Teil von jener Kraft/ Die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft.”) ↩︎

---

Related posts