Language appropriation is inherently a process of cultural translation which also signifies dispossession in hermeneutical terms. Tan et al. (20090) explain that as a process of cultural translation, appropriation involves a moment of self-reflection whose transformative power can only be activated by the development of critical dispositions and human action in the subject who is 'appropriate. Critical appropriation encompasses opening dialogic space for critique and empowerment, that is, “opening up to an expanded self, to incorporate other possible worlds into your world” (Tan and al., 2009, p. 8), while the use of standardization is intrinsically a process. An ideological process which points towards the singularization of a linguistic variety, appropriation is a moment of resistance which opens a space for action. It should be clear that appropriation also does not necessarily imply cultural change or a change in behaviors and norms. Appropriating a language means learning to adapt to different worldviews in a dialogic and reflexive way. Appropriating a language, as Trappes-Lomax (2002) says, does not only consist of adopting a particular language for communication purposes, but also marks emergence. new identities. It is significant, however, to note that while appropriation can serve transformative purposes and recognize learner agency, the appropriation of English in most postcolonial spaces is fraught with tensions and difficulties. which deserve to be mentioned here. The problem of appropriation and legitimacy is perhaps one of the most controversial issues in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages ​​(TESOL) (Norton, 1997, 2006). A number of ESL researchers have argued that although learners in postcolonial spaces have... middle of paper ......, they can experience the multi-layered nature of classroom discourse and discover how learners construct and resist various forms of cultural texts. These include the culture and ideologies of teachers and learners that influence both identity and literacy. Ferreira and Alexandre (2000) suggest that cultivating such knowledge helps foster an educational culture that is both transformative and liberating. Here, the focus is on how local speakers use various resources to make sense of, negotiate, construct and reconstruct social identities (Farrell & Makalela, 2009). In this context, the prevalent monolingual bias in TESOL/ESL is at odds with the pedagogical practices required for 21st century society in which translanguaging, that is, the use of various linguistic and non-linguistic resources, n 'is not an exception, but the norm (Creese & Black Rim, 2011).