Linguistic Capital?
From Bourdieu’s perspective, linguistic capital can be defined as the set of linguistic resources that are socially recognized as legitimate and capable of conferring on an individual a distinct value and advantage in the linguistic and labor markets where they are mobilized.
In reality, these are discursive resources. “What circulates in the language market is not ‘the language,’ but stylistically characterized discourses, both on the production side—insofar as each speaker develops an idiolect from the common language—and on the reception side—insofar as each recipient contributes to producing the message they perceive and appreciate by bringing to it everything that constitutes their singular and collective experience.” (Bourdieu, 1982, p. 6).
Discursive resources that are socially and economically valued and legitimized generate social and economic inequalities among speakers of the same dominant language. For example, an English-speaking employee who has a less solid command of legitimate discursive norms may have fewer opportunities to secure a prestigious position in the labor market. Conversely, a person who has a solid command of legitimate or dominant discursive norms is more likely to secure a prestigious job. The social and economic legitimization of certain discursive norms inherent in a colonial or dominant language thus contributes to creating inequalities of opportunity among social actors, making some of them more employable than others. These norms make this language both an instrument of socioeconomic inclusion and exclusion.
No language is inherently colonial. By “colonial language,” we mean a language that was disseminated through colonization, imposed on peoples subjected to political, economic, and military domination, and that has gradually acquired international, even global, reach.
However, discursive norms that are of limited legitimacy—or even illegitimate—within the dominant linguistic market may acquire value in other social markets, particularly in certain sectors of the informal or illegal labor market. Thus, the value of a linguistic and discursive resource is never intrinsic: it depends on the market in which it is mobilized and on the power relations or dynamics of domination that determine its recognition.
At the local, national, and international levels, the exclusion of languages and discourses (in the linguistic sense of the term “discourse”) of historically and culturally marginalized social groups fuels the phenomenon of symbolic linguicide (Damus, 2021; Gürsoy, 2025). Their invisibilization and marginalization constitute, in many contexts, an obstacle to upward social mobility and, in the context of migration, can even promote trajectories of downward social mobility. Consequently, promoting the languages of historically marginalized groups in local, national, and international labor markets is an imperative of historical, social, linguistic, and cognitive justice. It can help reduce the institutional mechanisms of symbolic linguicide within public and private organizations and companies.
If I were to immigrate to a non-French-speaking country such as Germany, I would likely be forced, for a certain period of time, to interrupt the process of upward social mobility from which I currently benefit. As the son of illiterate farmers, I have become an international researcher and a citizen of the world. In a context where my language skills would be less recognized, I might find myself, for example, working as a taxi driver. My mother tongue, Creole, and my second language, French, could then be symbolically devalued—or even rendered invisible—in a social and linguistic marketplace where they are not put to use. This is what I call symbolic linguicide (Damus, 2021, UNESCO Think Tank).
What is meant by regenerative and restorative linguistic capital?
To combat the social, epistemic, and economic injustices caused by linguistic capital as it is currently conceived and implemented, it must be transformed into “ regenerative and restorative linguistic capital”. This could be defined as follows:
Regenerative and restorative linguistic capital refers to a person’s ability to mobilize, in a professional context, the linguistic, discursive, cultural, and epistemic resources associated with their native language, and to have these recognized as legitimate professional resources, without prior mastery of a dominant language or adherence to the discursive norms it imposes being prerequisites for accessing the labor market.
It is no longer merely a matter of empowering individuals to acquire the dominant language, but of transforming social and professional markets so that their own linguistic and discursive resources can become recognized and valued resources.
The use of the languages of immigrants of Haitian and African origin serves as an example of social, epistemic, economic, and linguistic justice within certain American manufacturing companies. For pragmatic reasons, a marginalized language such as Haitian Creole and a global language such as French are used to facilitate the operations of these companies.
According to an interview with a close friend who speaks both French and Creole and who worked at a U.S. manufacturing company specializing in plastic products, it was essential to provide interpretation from Creole and French into English—for Haitian and African employees, respectively—to enable them to make themselves understood by the human resources department. These employees thus benefited from her active multilingualism. In addition, as part of her employment contract, she provided training in Creole and French to Haitian and African employees, particularly in the areas of safety and quality.
This person’s multilingualism serves not only for oral translation; it becomes a directly accessible professional resource, as it enables employees to access company services and receive essential training in the languages they are fluent in. This practice would benefit from being adopted more widely within companies that employ immigrants in order to help stem the process of symbolic linguicide. It not only promotes the economic integration of immigrants but also strengthens mutual understanding and solidarity between the multilingual trainer and these individuals—two conditions essential to professional effectiveness.
It helps prevent misunderstandings and wasted time between immigrants and human resources staff. A Haitian immigrant who had come to the human resources department did not understand a question about his date of birth. The human resources employee then asked Google to translate the question into Creole. However, Google Translate provided an incorrect translation. As a result, the Haitian immigrant spent his time recounting his personal experiences instead of providing his date of birth. The human resources department ultimately had to call a relative of mine to resolve the situation.
Interpretation in the workplace is a matter of social and historical justice. To enhance the employability of people whose native language is devalued and marginalized in the linguistic and economic markets, it should be further promoted within companies in both the Global North and the Global South. In the Global South, it is unfair to require local workers to be fluent in English or French in order to secure a job with a Western company that has outsourced operations there. Western monolingualism should not be the sole criterion for recognizing and valuing the linguistic and discursive skills of social actors. The multilingualism of local and international workers should be viewed as an economic resource for companies, not as an obstacle to their professional integration. Its implementation could even foster innovation within companies by liberating thought and speech and by promoting what might be called “cognitive polyculture” (the diversity of ways of thinking).
Regenerative and restorative linguistic capital refers to the ability of a social actor to mobilize and gain recognition for their non- linguistic and discursive resources—not only in accessing the labor market but also within the workplace itself, where these resources can contribute to communication, collaboration, innovation, and the advancement of greater social, linguistic, and epistemic justice.
Inaugural keynote lecture at the symposium “Language Capital: Connecting Employability and Lifelong Learning Through Multilingual Pathways,” University of Law / AULC, Special Interest Group on Inclusive Pedagogies.
September 10, 2026
References
Bourdieu, P. (1982). What It Means to Speak: The Economy of Linguistic Exchanges. Paris: Fayard.
Damus (2020). The Futures of Education at the Crossroads of Northern and Southern Epistemologies (Article commissioned for the report of UNESCO’s “The Futures of Education” initiative), Paris, UNESCO.
Damus (2021), “Toward an Epistemological Alliance for the Decolonization of Knowledge in the Global South and the Global North,” Idea Lab UNESCO Northhttps://www.unesco.org/en/articles/towards-epistemological-alliance-decolonization-knowledge-global-south-and-global-north
Damus (2024). “Regenerative and Restorative Pedagogy: The Foundation of a New Contract for Cognitive Justice.” UNESCO-IBE Prospects 54, 441–449 (2024). “Regenerative and Restorative Pedagogy: The Foundation of a New Contract for Cognitive Justice” | PROSPECTS (springer.com)
Gürsoy, E. 2025. (Nachhaltiger) Erhalt von minorisierten Sprachen und translingualen Sprach praktiken, in Migrationspädagogische Zweitsprachdidaktik, Linguizismuskritische (Zweitsprach-) Didaktik, pp.106-124.