Erasmus, the European language exchange programme, turns 27 this year, and is still as popular as ever – with 3 million participants since 1987 according to recent figures from the European Commission. The Council of Europe expected that increased student mobility as part of the programme would lead to the emergence of an “Erasmus generation”, which not only speaks multiple languages, but also has “plurilingual competences” based on values of humanism, tolerance, and democratic citizenship. Deborah Meunier, an Assistant in the University of Liège's Unit of Didactics and Methodology of French as a Foreign and Second Language, evaluated this claim as part of her doctoral thesis entitled: Linguistic representations of Erasmus students and the European plurilingual vision: norms, discourses, learning.

Deborah Meunier, an Assistant in the University of Liège's Unit of Didactics and Methodology of French as a Foreign and Second Language conducted a study focused on two types of discourse. First of all, she analysed European Union and Council of Europe documents on student mobility in the Erasmus programme, examining how Europe has made plurilingualism and/or the Erasmus programme the foundation of its education policies. The study then analysed the discourses of non-francophone Erasmus students at the beginning and end of their stay in Liège. Did they see themselves differently than before? Had they acquired the plurilingual competences the Council of Europe was hoping for? Had their relationship to linguistic and social standards changed? By focusing on these two discursive groups, the researcher was able to analyse how closely they matched and suggest improvements for the future. 

The plurilingual competence of the Erasmus generation

The notion of plurilingual competence is at the heart of all major Council of Europe studies. "Europe's expert researchers developed the concept of plurilingual competence, which goes beyond plurilingual practice", explains Deborah Meunier. Plurilingual competence is not just the ability to speak several languages, but also serves as a tool to develop humanist values such as respect for cultural diversity and awareness of democratic citizenship.  

We could hypothesise that Erasmus students immersed in a new environment would experience a sense of otherness that would inspire them to develop a new tolerance for cultural and linguistic diversity. Rather than pursue the (unrealistic?) ideal of perfect bilingualism, they would value partial understanding of foreign languages. They would also become more tolerant of foreign accents. In general, they would become more flexible about social and linguistic standards. More than just providing the opportunity to practice new languages, the Erasmus programme would inspire students to develop new ways of being that are more consistent with Europe's plural identity.  

The paradoxical duality of European discourses

However, Deborah Meunier immediately identified an important paradox within European documents. “The EU discourses continue to rank languages in a functional way, which is incompatible with the plurilingual or pluralist values promoted by the Council of Europe", she writes. This "functional ranking" in fact categorises languages according to economic criteria: for example, immersion in an English-speaking country is presented as an undeniable advantage in the job market. In addition to creating a hierarchy of languages based on utility, this discourse turns language proficiency into an object of performance.

There is therefore a contradiction within European discourses between the stated intent to promote partial understanding and demystify the ideal of bilingualism, and arguments based on linguistic performance within a competitive context in which proficiency in certain languages is required to stand out. The humanist discourse is thus combined with an economic and utilitarian discourse to varying degrees. Deborah Meunier sees this as a paradox, and suggests that the EU may be trying to "soften a neo-liberal discourse with humanist values." 

The same duality among students

The students that Deborah Meunier interviewed also expressed this tension between humanist and utilitarian objectives. "The same paradox was also present among the students. They were determined to acquire excellent language skills, while acknowledging that the purpose of the programme was discovery and acceptance," she explains. In her conclusion, she described students who vacillated between the two opposing positions. The first one is relativist - in order to communicate, learners must have a flexible attitude towards the standards of the target language, and value even partial language acquisition. The second is purist - for example, students rejected foreign accents and stigmatised those who didn't speak the target language perfectly. The predominance of one position or the other depended on the student, the situation... and the language.