This issue 52 closes, as if in mirror, the year 2025. This delivery, a varia, certainly invites us to change vintages, but also to go to the other side of the mirror, to this other place, that of paradigm shifts, of the unexpected reversal of perspectives, scales and points of view, and no doubt also into that of fantasy and imagination. It is to this unpredictable trajectory that the three texts of this new issue invite us, a research text (Wei Xue and Florence Mourlhon-Dallies) and two experience stories (Edna Castello on the one hand, Nicolas Szilas on the other). The first two of these texts focus on the learning of foreign languages, either French and Japanese through “urban landscapes” in the context of a private Chinese university, or French during workshops to learn digital skills attended in France by many exiles “far from the written word”.

1 https://crem.univ-lorraine.fr/recherche/contrats-recherche/hybridation-des-dispositifs-et-pratiques (...) 2Then come the contributions to the Debate-Discussion section, devoted this year to the reconfiguration of the notion of hybrid courses and their evolution (Natasha Noben, Stéphanie Fleck and Pierre Beust) and coordinated this year by Luc Massou who signs the concluding text. It should be remembered that the section has been enriched throughout the year by the work carried out as part of the HyPES project.1 Finally, two reading notes (Boukhalfa, Ait Hocine and Léna Boukhelifa) complete the issue.

2 This notion is quite recent. To define it, the researchers refer to the definition of Landry and Bo (...) 3The first contribution, proposed by Wei Xue and Florence Mourlhon-Dallies, takes us to the discovery of “linguistic landscapes2”, their collaborative analysis and their effects to strengthen, in the context of MOOCs (LMooc), language learning, interaction and collaborative production of learners. This research was conducted as part of a biotechnology faculty at a private Chinese university in the city of Wuhan.

The text, “Fostering Interaction and Collaborative Production through Linguistic Landscape Activities in LMooc”, is the result of the doctoral research of Wei Xue (Université Paris Cité, EDA). The authors formulate a general hypothesis according to which the collaborative analysis of linguistic landscapes (the real world, the urban environment, but also their visual representations) can “boost language learning if it is backed by forums in MOOCs, and more specifically in LMoocs. It seems that the integration of an activity linked to the linguistic landscape can offer promising avenues for promoting interaction and collaboration between learners”. The approach is part of an action-oriented perspective—a perspective of social action—which, according to the authors, marks a paradigm shift insofar as on the one hand individual-centred learning is giving way to learning based on collaboration, and on the other hand role-playing is giving way to a “project-based pedagogy, spread out over time”.

The authors present two successive training systems, different in many aspects: sample size and composition, fully distance or hybrid training system, evolution of pedagogical scenarios and support methods, use of an interactive map for the publication of documents produced by students. In conclusion, Wei Xue and Florence Mourlhon-Dallies suggest several avenues for language teaching. Overall, the importance of designing learning activities in a real-world context promotes engagement and authentic interaction. More particularly in the digital context of learning, they remind us of the need to develop the use of interactive tools, such as forums and interactive maps, to encourage the co-construction of knowledge and the development of language skills. But above all, they show that the collaborative analysis of linguistic landscapes is an approach that promotes this learning in the context of an LMooc.

3 We will recall his previous publication in DMS-DMK, 32, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.5923. 4 Juliette, Aller sans retour (accessed Decembre 6, 2025). Song to (re)listen to. 6Edna Castello3 in her contribution “Informal acquisition of french language in digital literacy workshops: evolving practices in supporting exiled individuals with limited writing and reading skills”, examines, on the basis of three specific training systems that she describes, the relevance of informal learning of written French through digital initiation for exiled people with little or no schooling. The author takes us on the path of exile—“a one-way trip4”—to a better “elsewhere” which is very often, unfortunately, only a lark’s mirror.

Although for “connected migrants” (Springer, 2017), the smartphone and a few applications are very often the only means of communication and the only link with their country of origin, their use of digital technology is very often limited. They are therefore regularly present in digital initiation workshops. For them, however, this situation highlights two difficulties, a double literacy deficit: literacy in the classical sense (in relation to the written language) and digital literacy. Indeed, the ability to develop their digital skills depends in part on their written language skills, in this case French. On the basis of this observation, E. Castello advocates for an approach that aims to promote the learning of the written language “by the gang”, when learning digital skills.

In her contribution, after delineating the multidimensional theoretical framework in which her reflection is set, she succinctly describes three particular training systems. Despite the fact that they are aimed at different audiences, that the objectives of the training courses are distinct, linguistic and literal progress as well as “the entanglement of the processes of linguistic acculturation and. digital technologies” could be observed. In conclusion, E. Castello on the one hand advocates for the complementarity of formal and informal learning which would allow learners to learn at their own pace and on the other hand she argues that the analysis of mediated communication practices constitutes a means of better understanding their effects on the learning of writing and more generally “the effects of instrumented scriptural practices on the processes of knowledge construction”.

Nicolas Szilas’ contribution, “Digital revolution on centre stage” stands out as an original account of experience. It surprises as much by the object she explores as by its style. The author wishes to break with the form that has gradually imposed itself as the academic model in distance learning, the “PowerPoint presentation” and its printed booklet: “an actor motionless at the side of the stage, reciting his text in an often monotonous way, while slides are projected at the back of the stage as a set.” So he proposes a completely different scenography—similar to the theatre of objects—including the hands and their fingers become the main actors playing the roles of stagehand, moving the sets and objects supposed to illustrate the teacher’s point (a voice-over), facilitator of the discourse by highlighting the different elements mentioned and finally, accompanist of the verbal discourse using gestures and non-verbal language to punctuate certain aspects. The conception of the pedagogical scenario as well as the discursive structure of this text are also part of the theatrical metaphor: the projected slides considered as a set, the teacher seen as an actor, an opening, a pre-show, the show itself and the post-show. The metaphor also allows us to explore the paradigm of the university form.

The exercise, repeated for three academic years, certainly shifts the practice of the expository course, but also those of the filmed course and video clips, which are omnipresent in distance or hybrid courses. This proposal seduces by its originality, by the inscription in the theatrical metaphor and of course by the very particular use of video. But it also raises an essential question that touches on the semiopragmatics of videographic representations: how are the two levels of representation, the theatrical performance that serves as a “course” and the video representation of the theatrical performance, articulated?

5 Charlier, B. and Peltier, C. (2024). Understanding the dynamics of co-construction of hybrid learni (...) 6 Noben, N. (2024). The added value of digital technology in education: conceptualization, modeling a (...) 7 Fleck, S. (2024). Rendre tangible l’intangible : Émergence de nouveaux possibles pour soutenir l’ex (...) 11The Debate-Discussion section offers three new contributions as well as the concluding text by Luc Massou. As a reminder, the texts are based on a rereading of the analytical framework for the co-construction of hybrid environments proposed by Bernadette Charlier and Claire Peltier (2024).5 The first, “Tooling the design and description of hybrid devices” is signed by Natasha Noben. Based on some observations made in the framework of the HyPES project and through the prism of her thesis work (2024)6, she proposes complementary tools that, according to her, make it possible to support the analysis and understanding of hybrid devices. Stéphanie Fleck proposes a contribution—obviously inspired by her habilitation thesis7. The reader will find in it her desire to “make the intangible tangible” and to “rethink pedagogical hybridization as a design process, simultaneously engaging: the learning environments, the interfaces and artefacts that constitute them, the experiences lived by learners and teachers.” The title of P. Beust’s contribution, “Places, assessments, artificial intelligence: three questions to think about the training environments of tomorrow” describes its content perfectly. He raises the question of the topicality of the initial framework and discusses the contribution of these three dimensions as potential avenues for its development and enrichment. Finally, Luc Massou offers an assessment of the interventions under the rubric: eight contributors with different functions, various academic profiles, including four postdoctoral researchers. From his rereading of the published texts, he identifies the three axes that have marked and nourished the debates. The first refers us to the fundamentals of the framework for the analysis of hybrid training systems, since it concerns the modalities of articulation between activities carried out in presence or at a distance and proposals for the co-construction of hybrid environments. The second axis concentrates pedagogical questions and processes since it deals with student success and learning. The third, and this is undoubtedly the one that most resonates with the texts in this issue, brings together reflections on the broadening of the paradigm of hybridization.

8 Mediation and Hierarchization of Knowledge on Communication. The case of vocational training. 9 Aude Seurrat, Knowledge in Circulation: Education and Training Resources in the Digital Age, ISTE É (...) 12Two reading notes complete this issue. First, Léna Boukhelifa comments on Aude Seurrat’s book, Médiation et hiérarchisation des savoirs sur la communication. Le cas de la formation professionnelle8, published this year by ISTE editions. For the record, A. Seurrat, who is very active in the review, had already published a book this year with the same publisher, which was the subject of a presentation in the previous issue9. According to L. Boukhelifa, this new book (based on its author’s habilitation thesis) invites us, quoting Castoriadis (1975, 223), to reflect “on the contemporary injunction to efficiency, its naturalization, its propagation in the teaching, training, and education sectors and also on the very nature of efficiency: for whom? With a view to what? Why do it? It enjoins us to question the links between sociotechnical imaginaries and the economic beliefs that underlie them. Thus, it could be particularly interesting to study the trivialization of this imperative of efficiency with regard to the multiple meanings that this principle can take on depending on the spaces and actors who participate in its circulation and transformation”.

10 Bortolotti, R. M. (2025). Conducting a distance and face-to-face ethnographic survey: construction (...) 11 Survey on the “new” digital sociabilities of young people in the city. 13Rosa Maria Bortoli’s thesis has been distinguished by the GIS 2if for the year 2023–2024. As such, she had the opportunity to publish in 2025 in Distances et médiations des savoirs an article resulting from her doctoral research10. Today, she publishes with Editions du Cygne a book, Jeunesses populaires en ligne. Enquête sur les « nouvelles » sociabilités numériques des jeunes de cités11. This book is the subject of the second reading note signed by Boukhalfa Ait Hocine. The latter recalls the author’s primary intention: to deconstruct the stereotypes often conveyed by the media and public opinion, which describe these young people as passive or even victims of social digital platforms. “On the contrary, it shows that they develop real adaptation skills, know how to use digital tools, negotiate social norms and overcome certain constraints imposed by their social environment”.

Rereading the contributions in this issue 52 arouses several reflections. First, the theme of distance and the reference to the notion of distance are both sufficiently consistent and sufficiently “decentring” in relation to the epistemologies of the established disciplines that it promotes and encourages the exploration of marginal or emerging concepts. This is shown by the three main contributions. This is the case of “linguistic landscapes”, a notion of a recent and minority trend in the field of language learning. In this case, this notion seems to combine several types of distance understood as displacement and/or distancing: first, the interlinguistic distance (between the learners’ mother tongue and the target language); then the ecological distancing (from the situations and contexts described in the learning manuals to the lived exploration of the city), semiotic (in terms of mediatization and mediation, through photographic shots, interpretation and analysis of these photos, or the use of an interactive map). These are three ways of distancing oneself. Their combination gives extra weight to learning language skills.

This is also the case of Edna Castello’s text, whose contribution focuses on “connected nomads”, migrants and exiles far from the written language. Learners enrol in training courses to acquire a (better) mastery of digital technology, but more or less, outside of any formal learning, raise their level of knowledge of the French language. The (epistemological) originality of his text could lie in its fundamental object, a kind of “interliteracycal” distance, a space where the synergies between linguistic and digital literacies, usually kept at a distance from each other, are played out.

Finally, Nicolas Szilas’ contribution occupies a special place in this trilogy. Metaphor, precisely theatrical metaphor, is indeed at the center of his reflection. As we know, metaphor is much more than a figure of rhetoric, “a comparison without likes” as has long been taught. According to Roman Jakobson (1963), metaphor is akin to paradigm while metonymy refers to syntagm. However, in de Saussure (1916/1968), the paradigm already constitutes a repertoire of mental relations between linguistic elements that have points in common and that would be substitutable at a point in the syntagmatic chain. The paradigm is, therefore, of the order of absence, of distancing.

A final comment. Our journal plays an important role in identifying and distinguishing quality researchers and disseminating their work. Four of the authors of this issue defended their doctoral thesis or HDR this year or the year before, work that gave rise to the publication of articles in DMS or books that the journal echoed through reading notes. In addition, four post-doctoral researchers participated in the Debate-Discussion section.

Our latest reflection focuses on the fruitful collaboration between the journal and ambitious research projects such as the HySup project in the past and now HyPES (ANR) led by the CREM, its team and its director Luc Massou. We thank them and all the colleagues involved in this project.

Issue 52 marks the end of 2025. Whether you share it at the foot of a Christmas tree, whether you take it with you to occupy these few days of rest, it doesn’t matter. We hope you enjoy reading it very well.

<footnote n="1">1 https://crem.univ-lorraine.fr/recherche/contrats-recherche/hybridation-des-dispositifs-et-pratiques-de-formation-dans-ens-sup (accessed Decembre 6, 2025).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 This notion is quite recent. To define it, the researchers refer to the definition of Landry and Bourhis (1997: 25): “The language of public road signs, advertising billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, and public signs on government buildings combine to form the linguistic landscape of a given territory, region, or urban agglomeration.”</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3 We will recall his previous publication in DMS-DMK, 32, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.5923.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4 Juliette, Aller sans retour (accessed Decembre 6, 2025). Song to (re)listen to.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5 Charlier, B. and Peltier, C. (2024). Understanding the dynamics of co-construction of hybrid learning environments: analytical framework and research avenues. Distances and Mediations of Knowledge, 45. https://doi.org/10.4000/dms.9749.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6 Noben, N. (2024). The added value of digital technology in education: conceptualization, modeling and analysis of learning activities [Doctoral thesis—University of Liège]. https://orbi.uliege.be/handle/2268/313406 (accessed Decembre 6, 2025).</footnote>

<footnote n="7">7 Fleck, S. (2024). Rendre tangible l’intangible : Émergence de nouveaux possibles pour soutenir l’expérience d’apprentissage ? Recherches par le design d’Interactions Humain-Machines hybrides en Éducation et Formation. Thèse d’habilitations à diriger des recherches (HDR). University of Strasbourg.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">8 Mediation and Hierarchization of Knowledge on Communication. The case of vocational training.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9 Aude Seurrat, Knowledge in Circulation: Education and Training Resources in the Digital Age, ISTE Éditions, 2025. See the reading note by S. Bosler (2025), DMS-DMK, 51. https://doi.org/10.4000/14y47.</footnote>

<footnote n="10">10 Bortolotti, R. M. (2025). Conducting a distance and face-to-face ethnographic survey: construction of a methodology, Distances and mediations of knowledge, 49. https://doi.org/10.4000/13jzz.</footnote>

<footnote n="11">11 Survey on the “new” digital sociabilities of young people in the city.</footnote>