Beyond the idealized native speaker in L2 Spanish contexts: Standard language ideology, authenticity, and consequences for learner identity construction

Abstract

Previous studies have been critical of standard language ideologies in universitylevel L2 Spanish instruction for their role in contributing to the power of hegemonic groups through their language varieties, for example, Castilian and Latin American norma culta (Milroy, 2001; Pomerantz, 2002; Valdés et al., 2003). The notion of a “standard” language has been identified as an abstract construct by many scholars who have argued that it promotes an image of an idealized native speaker that is not reflective of authentic conversational contexts (Ortega, 1999; Pomerantz, 2002; Train, 2003). Therefore, reinforcing standard language ideology in L2 curricula not only contributes to the power of hegemonic groups while marginalizing others, it also leaves students unprepared for the linguistic diversity found in authentic conversational contexts. This study examines the ideological underpinnings of how sociolinguistic variation in Spanish is presented in beginning and intermediate-level Spanish as Foreign Language (SFL) and Spanish as a Heritage Language (SHL) curricula at a large, Southwestern university. Textbooks were analyzed and focus groups from both SFL and SHL courses were conducted. This study centers on the focus group interview data, and findings include evidence of a reinforcement of standard language ideology and particular stigmatization of U.S. varieties of Spanish in both SFL and SHL courses. It is argued that, at times, this stigmatization points to an ideology of racialization of Spanish-speakers in the United States (Cobas, Duany, & Feagin, 2009). In addition, the findings indicate that the ideology of Spanish as an exclusively “foreign” language is perpetuated, a claim that has been disputed in regard to the United States, since it is one of the world’s top Spanish-speaking countries (Train, 2009). Pedagogical suggestions for program directors and instructors seeking to enact paradigm changes that resist the discourses of standard language ideology are discussed.