This article introduces and defines the notion lingua receptiva (LaRa) as a mode of multilingual communication in which interactants employ a language and/or a language variety different from their partner’s and still understand each other without the help of any additional lingua franca. The quintessence of lingua receptiva is discussed in terms of pragmatic, psycholinguistic and language psychology approaches to multilingualism. Moreover, the occurrence of this mode is documented across various language families throughout time and in various discursive intercultures which it creates. Furthermore, three central characteristics are discussed, namely ideological barriers resulting in asymmetry, ‘inference-making’ mechanisms and the function of idiomatic expressions. Finally, lingua receptiva is compared to other multilingual modes, especially with English as lingua franca.
AfsharK. (2007). ‘Du sollst baqal-e baƀa ҟommen, nicht er …!’ – Zum Sprachwechsel in einer persisch-deutschen Familie. In MengK.RehbeinJ. (Eds.), Kinderkommunikation – einsprachig und mehrsprachig. Mit einer erstmals auf Deutsch publizierten Arbeit von Lev. S Vygotskij, Zur Frage nach der Mehrsprachigkeit im kindlichen Alter (pp. 335–370). Münster and New York: Waxmann.
2.
AgoyaC. N. (forthcoming). Die Sprachsituation Kenias als Voraussetzung für die Vermittlung des Deutschen als Fremdsprache. Münster and New York: Waxmann.
3.
AllwoodJ.AbelarY. (1984). Lack of understanding, misunderstanding and adult language acquisition. In ExtraG.MitnerM. (Eds.), Studies in second language acquisition by adult immigrants (pp. 27–55). Tilburg: University Press.
4.
AllwoodJ.SimonotM. (1984). Understanding, misunderstanding and breakdown. In PerdueC. (Ed.), Second language acquisition. A field manual (pp. 68–94). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
5.
AlptekinC. (2010). Redefining multicompetence for bilingualism and ELF. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 95–110.
6.
BackusA. (1996). Two in one. Bilingual speech of Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands. Tilburg: University Press.
7.
BeerkensR. (2010). Receptive multilingualism as a language mode in the Dutch–German border area. Münster: Waxmann.
8.
BertheleR. (2007a). Zum Prozess des Verstehens und Erschließens. In HufeisenB.MarxN. (Eds.), EuroComGerm – Die sieben Siebe. Germanische Sprachen lesen lernen (pp. 15–26). Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
9.
BertheleR. (2007b). Sieb 5: Syntaktische Strukturen. In HufeisenB.MarxN. (Eds.), EuroComGerm – Die sieben Siebe: Germanische Sprachen lesen lernen (pp. 167–179). Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
10.
BertheleR. (2008). Dialekt-Standard Situationen als embryonale Mehrsprachigkeit. Erkenntnisse zum interlingualen Potenzial des Provinzlerdaseins. In MattheierK. J.LenzA. (Eds.), Dialektsoziologie/Dialect Sociology/Sociologie du Dialecte. Sociolinguistica, Vol. 22 (pp. 87–107). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
11.
Blanche-BenvenisteC. (2008). Comment retrouver l’expérience des anciens voyageurs en terres de langues romanes? In ContiV.GrinF. (Eds.), S’entendre entre langues voisines: Vers l’intercompréhension (pp. 33–51). Chêne-Bourg: Georg.
12.
BraunmüllerK. (2002). Semicommunication and accomodation: Observations from the linguistic situation in Scandinavia. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 1–23.
13.
BraunmüllerK. (2007). Receptive multilingualism in Northern Europe in the Middle Ages: A description of a scenario. In ten ThijeJ. D.ZeevaertL. (Eds.), Receptive multilingualism (pp. 25–47). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
14.
BremerK.BroederP.RobertsC.SimonotM.VasseurM. (1996). The making of understanding in extended interactions: Case studies. In BremerK.. (Eds.), Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural encounters (pp. 109–158). London: Longman.
15.
BühlerK. (1934). Sprachtheorie. Jena: Fischer.
16.
BührigK. (1996). Reformulierende Handlungen. Zur Analyse sprachlicher Adaptierungsprozesse in institutioneller Kommunikation. Tübingen: Narr.
17.
BührigK.ten ThijeJ. D. (Eds.), (2006). Beyond misunderstanding: Linguistic analyses of intercultural communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
18.
CalvetL.-J. (1996). Les politiques linguistiques. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
19.
CarrollJ. B.FreedleR. O. (Eds.), (1972). Language comprehension and the acquisition of knowledge. New York: Wiley.
20.
CasadE. (1974). Dialect intelligibility testing. SIL Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields, nr. 38. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
21.
CasadE. (2005). Analyses of intelligibility/Verständlichkeitsanalyse. Art. 125. In AmmonU.DittmarN.MattheierK. J.TrudgillP. (Eds.), An international handbook of the science of language and society (pp. 1261–1272). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
22.
ChaojuT.van HeuvenV. J. (2009). Mutual intelligibility of Chinese dialects experimentally tested. Lingua, 119, 709–732.
23.
ClarkH. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: University Press.
24.
ClarkH. H.HavilandS. E. (1977). Comprehension and the given-new contracts. In FreedleR. O. (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension (pp. 1–40). Norwood, MA: Ablex.
25.
ContiV.GrinF. (Eds.), (2008). S’entendre entre langues voisines: Vers l’intercompréhension. Chêne-Bourg: Georg.
26.
CorriganR. L.MoravcsikE. A.OualiH.WheatleyK. M. (Eds.), (2009). Formulaic Language, 2 vol. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27.
DascalM. (2003). Interpretation and understanding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
28.
de AngelisG. (2007). Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon, OH: Multilingual Matters.
29.
EhlichK.RehbeinJ. (1986). Muster und Institution. Untersuchungen zur schulischen Kommunikation. Tübingen: Narr.
European Commission. (2007). A rewarding challenge – How language diversity could strengthen Europe. Proposals from the Group of Intellectuals for Intercultural Dialogue set up at the Initiative of the European Commission. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
32.
Fabricius-HansenC.HeringerH.-J. (1988). Die Idee einer rezeptiven Grammatik und ihre Realisierung. InfoDaF. Information Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 15(2), 164–175.
33.
FishmanJ. A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theory and practice of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon, OH: Multilingual Matters.
34.
FishmanJ. A. (2004). Language maintenance, language shift, and reversing language shift. In BhatiaT.RitchieW. (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism (pp. 406–436). Oxford: Blackwell.
35.
FreedleR. O. (Ed.). (1977). Discourse production and comprehension. Norwood, MA: Ablex.
36.
GooskensC. (2007). The contribution of linguistic factors to the intelligibility of closely related languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 28, 445–467.
37.
GrinF. (2008). L’intercompréhension, efficience et équité. In ContiV.GrinF. (Eds.), S’entendre entre langues voisines: Vers l’intercompréhension (pp. 79–109). Chêne-Bourg: Georg.
38.
GrosjeanF. (2008). Studying bilinguals. Oxford: University Press.
39.
GrosjeanF. (2010). Bilingual: Life and reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
GumperzJ. J. (1971). Language in social groups. Essays. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
41.
GumperzJ. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Oxford: University Press.
42.
GumperzJ. J. (1992). Contextualization and understanding. In DurantiA.GoodwinC. (Eds.), Rethinking Context (pp. 229–252). New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
GumperzJ. J. (1995). Mutual inferencing in conversation. In MarkováI.GraumannC. F.FoppaK. (Eds.), Mutualities in dialogue (pp. 101–123). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
GumperzJ. J.RobertsC. (1991). Understanding in intercultural encounters. In BloemmaertJ.VerschuerenJ. (Eds.), The pragmatics of intercultural and international communication (pp. 51–90). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
45.
HaugenE. (1962). Semicommunication: The language gap in Scandinavian. In LiebersonS. (Ed.), (1967) Explorations in sociolinguistics (pp. 152–169). Bloomington: Indiana University.
46.
HaugenE. (1981). Interlanguage. In HaugenE. (1987). Blessings of Babel. Bilingualism and language planning (pp. 77–81). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
47.
HinnenkampV. (2000). Constructing misunderstanding as a cultural event. In Di LuzioA.GünthnerS.OrlettiS. (Eds.), Culture in communication. Analyses of intercultural situations (pp. 211–243). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
48.
HoltgravesT. (2007). Second language learners and speech act comprehension. Language Learning, 57(4), 595–610.
49.
HörmannH. (1976). Meinen und Verstehen. Grundzüge einer psychologischen Semantik. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.
50.
HouseJ. (2003). English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism?Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7, 556–578.
51.
HouseJ.RehbeinJ. (2004). What is ‘multilingual communication’? In HouseJ.RehbeinJ. (Eds.), Multilingual communication: Hamburg studies on multilingualism3 (pp. 1–17). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
52.
IngramJ. C. L. (2007). Neurolinguistics: An introduction to spoken language processing and its disorders. Cambridge: University Press.
53.
IrvineJ. T.GalS. (2009). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In DurantiA. (Ed.), Linguistic anthropology (pp. 402–434). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
54.
JaninP. (2008). L’intercompréhension dans une politique francophone du plurilinguisme. In ContiV.GrinF. (Eds.), S’entendre entre langues voisines: Vers l’intercompréhension (pp. 53–77). Chêne-Bourg: Georg.
55.
JensenJ. B. (1989). On the mutual intelligibility of Spanish and Portuguese. Hispania, 72(4), 848–852.
56.
KameyamaS. (2004). Verständnissicherndes Handeln. Zur reparativen Bearbeitung von Rezeptionsdefiziten in deutschen und japanischen Diskursen. Münster and New York: Waxmann.
57.
KellermannE. (1977). Toward a characterization of the strategy of transfer in second language learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 2, 58–145.
58.
KellermannE. (1995). Crosslinguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 125–150.
59.
KompasováS. (1999/2000). Čeština ve vysílání slovenské televizní stanice Markíza [Czech in the broadcasts of the Slovak television channel Markíza]. Češtinář, 10, 156–163.
60.
KooleT.ten ThijeJ. D. (1994). The construction of intercultural discourse: Team discussions of educational advisers. Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.
61.
KooleT.ten ThijeJ. D. (2001). The construction of intercultural discourse. Methodological considerations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 571–587.
62.
LüdiG. (2006). Multilingual repertoires and the consequences for linguistic theory. In BührigK.ten ThijeJ. D. (Eds.), Beyond misunderstanding: Linguistic analyses of intercultural communication (pp. 11–42). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
63.
LüdiG. (2007). The Swiss model of plurilingual communication. In BührigK.ten ThijeJ. D. (Eds.), Beyond misunderstanding: Linguistic analyses of intercultural communication (pp. 159–178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
64.
LüdiG.PyB. (2009). To be or not to be … a plurilingual speaker. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6, 154–167.
65.
MatrasY. (2009). Language contact. Cambridge: University Press.
66.
MatrasY.BakkerP. (Eds.). (2003). The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
67.
NábělkováM. (2008). Slovenčina a čeština v kontakte: Pokračovanie príbehu [Slovak and Czech in Contact: Continuation of the Story]. Bratislava, Praha: Veda, Filozofická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze.
ParadisM. (1994). Toward a neurolinguistic theory of simultaneous translation: The framework. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 3(29), 319–335.
70.
ParadisM. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
71.
PiccalugaM.HarmegniesB. (2008). Aux sources de l’intercompréhension. Facteurs psycholinguistiques de la qualité interprétative en langues proches. In ContiV.GrinF. (Eds.), S’entendre entre langues voisines: Vers l’intercompréhension (pp. 169–195). Chêne-Bourg: Georg.
72.
PickeringM. J.GarrodS. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–225.
73.
PisoniD. B.RemezR. E. (Eds.). (2005). The handbook of speech perception. Oxford: Blackwell.
74.
RehbeinJ. (1977). Komplexes Handeln. Elemente zur Handlungstheorie der Sprache. Stuttgart: Metzler.
75.
RehbeinJ. (1984). Reparative Handlungsmuster und ihre Verwendungen im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Roligpapir 30/1984. Roskilde: Universitetscenter.
76.
RehbeinJ. (1987). Diskurs und Verstehen. Zur Rolle der Muttersprache bei der Textverarbeitung in der Zweitsprache. In ApelauerE. (Ed.) Gesteuerter Zweitspracherwerb (pp. 113–172). München: Hueber.
77.
RehbeinJ. (2001). Turkish in European societies. In Lingua e Stile, 35(I-2), 317–334.
78.
RehbeinJ. (2006). The cultural apparatus: Thoughts on the relationship between language, culture and society. In BührigK.ten ThijeJ. D. (Eds.), Beyond misunderstanding: Linguistic analyses of intercultural communication (pp. 43–96). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
79.
RehbeinJ. (2007). Erzählen in zwei Sprachen – auf Anforderung. In MengK.RehbeinJ. (Eds.), Kinderkommunikation – einsprachig und mehrsprachig. Mit einer erstmals auf Deutsch publizierten Arbeit von Lev. S Vygotskij, Zur Frage nach der Mehrsprachigkeit im kindlichen Alter (pp. 389–453). Münster and New York: Waxmann.
80.
RehbeinJ.HerkenrathA.KarakoçB. (2007). Rehbein-SKOBI (Sprachliche Konnektivität bei bilingual türkisch-deutsch aufwachsenden Kindern und Jugendlichen). Universität Hamburg: EXMARaLDA. SFB 538-Korpora: E5. URL: http://www.exmaralda.org/en_index.html
81.
RehbeinJ.HerkenrathA.KarakoçB. (2009). Turkish in Germany – On contact-induced language change of an immigrant language in the multilingual landscape of Europe. In STUF – Language Typology and Universals, 62(3), 161–204.
82.
RehbeinJ.KameyamaS. (2003). Pragmatik. In AmmonU.DittmarN.MattheierK.TrudgillP. (Eds.),‘Sociolinguistics’/‘Soziolinguistik’: An international handbook of the science of language and society (pp. 556–588). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
83.
RehbeinJ.MassakowaG. (forthcoming). Inferential procedures in Kazakh–Turkish talk. Lingua Receptiva: Intenational Journal of Multilingualism (special issue).
84.
Rindler SchjerveR. (2007) Linguistic diversity in Habsburg Austria as a model for modern European language policy. In ten ThijeJ. D.ZeevaertL. (Eds.), Receptive multilingualism (pp. 49–70). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
85.
RobertsC. (1996). A social perspective on understanding: Some issues of theory and method. In BremerK.. (1996). Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural encounters (pp. 9–36). London: Longman.
86.
RobertsP. (2005). Spoken English as a world language: International and intranational settings. PhD thesis, University of Nottingham.
87.
RontuH. (2010). Putting policies into practice. Talk given at the EUNoM symposium on higher education and research on multilingualism: Change or opportunity?Leeuwarden, November.
88.
SacksH. (1985). The inference-making machine: Notes on observability. In van DijkT. (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. 3 (pp. 13–23). London: Academic Press.
89.
SchmidtM.KöpkeB.KeijzerM.WeilemarL. (Eds.), (2004). First language attrition. Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
90.
SchmidtT. (2006). EXMARaLDA. Partitur-Editor Handbuch. Version 1.3.2. University of Hamburg: Collaborative Research Institute (SFB 538)Multilingualism. URL: http://www.exmaralda.org/downloads.html
91.
SchoberM. F.BrennanS. E. (2003). Processes of interactive spoken discourse: The role of the partner. In GraesserA. C.GernsbacherM. A.GoldmanS. R. (Eds.), Handbook of discourse processes (pp. 123–164). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
92.
SeidlhoferB. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209–239.
93.
SeidlhoferB.BreitenederA.PitzlM.-L. (2006). English as a Lingua Franca in Europe: Challenges for applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 26, 3–34.
94.
SerraC. (2010). Social representations of plurilingualism and of plurilingual language teaching in universities’ language policies and in academic teachers’ discourse. Talk given at the EUNoM symposium on higher education and research on multilingualism: Change or opportunity?Leeuwarden, November.
95.
SinclairJ. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: University Press.
96.
SingerM. (2007). Inference processing in discourse comprehension. In GaskellM. G.. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 342–359). Oxford: University Press.
97.
SpolskyB. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge: University Press.
98.
ten ThijeJ. D. (2003a). The transition from misunderstanding to understanding in intercultural communication. In KomlósiL.HoutlosserP.LeezenbergM. (Eds.), Communication and culture. Argumentative, cognitive and linguistic perspectives (pp. 197–213). Amsterdam: SicSac – International Centre for the Study of Argumentation.
99.
ten ThijeJ. D. (2003b). Eine Pragmatik der Mehrsprachigkeit: Zur Analyse, diskursiver Interkulturen. In De CilliaR.KrummJ.WodakR. (Eds.), Die Kosten der Mehrsprachigkeit – Globalisierung und sprachliche Vielfalt/The Cost of Multilingualism – Globalisation and Linguistic Diverstity/Le Cout du Plurilinguism – Mondialisation et diversité linguistique’ (pp. 101–125). Wien: Akademie der Wissenschaften.
100.
ten ThijeJ. D.ZeevaertL. (Eds.), (2007). Receptive multilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
101.
van BerkumJ. J. A.ZwitserloodP.HagoortP.BrownC. M. (2003). Research report: When and how do listeners relate a sentence to the wider discourse? Evidence from the N400 effect. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 701–718.
102.
van GompelR. P. G.PickeringM. (2007). Syntactic parsing. In GaskellM.GarethM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 289–307). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
103.
VoegelinC. F.HarrisZ. S. (1951). Methods for determining intelligibility among dialects of natural languages. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 95, 322–329.
104.
WerlenI. (2007). Receptive multilingualism in Switzerland and the case Biel/Bienne. In BührigK.ten ThijeJ. D. (Eds.), Beyond Misunderstanding: Linguistic analyses of intercultural communication (pp. 137–157). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
105.
WolffH. (1964). Intelligibility and inter-ethnic attitudes. In HymesD. (Ed.), Language in culture and society (pp. 440–445). New York: Harper & Row.
106.
WurmS. A.MühlhäuslerP.TryonD. T. (Eds.), (1996). Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
107.
YağmurK. (1997). First language attrition among Turkish speakers in Sydney. Tilburg, the Netherlands: University Press.
108.
ZeevaertL. (2004). Interskandinavische Kommunikation. Strategien zur Etablierung von Verständigung zwischen Skandinaviern im Diskurs. Hamburg: Dr. Kovač.
109.
ZeevaertL. (2007). Receptive multilingualism and inter-Scandinavian semicommunication. In ten ThijeJ. D.Zeevaert (Eds.), Receptive multilingualism (pp. 103–135). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
110.
ZemanJ. (1997). K přijímání slovenské kultury Čechy po rozpadu Československa [Reception of Slovak culture after the dissolution of Czechoslovakia]. In OndrejovičS. (Ed.), Slovenčina na konci 20. storočia, jej normy a perspektívy (pp. 182–186). Bratislava: Veda.
111.
ZemanJ. (2008). Konverzační opravy v projevech Slováků v českých médiích [Conversational repairs in the speech of Slovaks in the Czech media]. In KraľčákĽ. (Ed.), Hovorená podoba jazyka v médiách (pp. 51–56). Nitra: Univerzita Konštantína Filozofa.
