Exploring Family Language Policy: Parental Perspectives in Homshetsma-Speaking Families

Family language policy in Italian transnational families in the UK: Influence of language ideologies on heritage language management

This paper focuses on the language shift phenomenon in Singapore as a consequence of the top-town policies. By looking at bilingual family language policies it examines the characteristics of Singapore’s multilingual nature and cultural diversity. Specifically, it looks at what languages are practiced and how family language policies are enacted in Singaporean English-Chinese bilingual families, and to what extend macro language policies – i.e. national and educational language policies influence and interact with family language policies. Involving 545 families and including parents and grandparents as participants, the study traces the trajectory of the policy history. Data sources include 2 parts: 1) a prescribed linguistic practices survey; and 2) participant observation of actual negotiation of FLP in face-to-face social interaction in bilingual English-Chinese families. The data provides valuable information on how family language policy is enacted and language practices are negotiated, and what linguistic practices have been changed and abandoned against the background of the Speaking Mandarin Campaign and the current bilingual policy implemented in the 1970s. Importantly, the detailed face-to-face interactions and linguistics practices are able to enhance our understanding of the subtleties and processes of language (dis)continuity in relation to policy interventions. The study also discusses the reality of language management measures in contrast to the government’s ‘separate bilingualism’ (Creese & Blackledge, 2011) expectations with regard to ‘striking a balance’ between Asian and Western culture (Curdt-Christiansen & Silver 2013; Shepherd, 2005) and between English and mother tongue languages (Curdt-Christiansen, 2014). Demonstrating how parents and children negotiate their family language policy through translanguaging or heteroglossia practices (Canagarajah, 2013; Garcia & Li Wei, 2014), this paper argues that ‘striking a balance’ as a political ideology places emphasis on discrete and separate notions of cultural and linguistic categorization and thus downplays the significant influences from historical, political and sociolinguistic contexts in which people find themselves. This simplistic view of culture and linguistic code will inevitably constrain individuals’ language expression as it regards code switching and translanguaging as delimited and incompetent language behaviour.

This paper reports on a study that used an ecological approach to explore family language policy and practice among Miao families in China. In the study, we surveyed 900 Miao families and interviewed 20 parents with regard to their language practices, ideologies, and management efforts, to identify what mediated their family language policy decisions. The analysis of the data revealed a noticeable decline in the use of the Miao language across different generations, and an inconsistency between language ideologies and language management efforts. These findings suggest that family language policy decisions are profoundly mediated by the language policies and practices promoted in different organizations at meso (e.g. school) and macro (e.g. national) levels, which constitute an exo-system external to the family domain. We conclude that it is necessary for all languages to be recognized as resources so that a favorable discursive space can be maintained for ethnic languages such as the Miao language in China.

Schools in the United States have historically conducted language policing in favor of standardized American English. The current study examines links between language policies in eight immigrant families in relation to educational language policies of two public elementary schools operating under an English-only policy in Massachusetts. The study places a focus on the agency of children and parents expressed through interviews, while paying attention to the institutional power of schooling. The participating families spoke Cape Verdean Creole, Mandarin, Portuguese, and Spanish as their heritage languages. Two theoretical frameworks informed our findings. Firstly, we use “family language policy” to define language decisions in families as a multifaceted construct. Secondly, we analyze family language beliefs and practices through a “language ideology” lens to unveil power structures influencing them. Our findings showed that the participants’ spoken beliefs positioned bilingualism and heritage language maintenance as valuable. However, family language decisions showed an increasing preference for English that inherently aligned with the English-only educational policies and practices and alienated heritage languages. Our study contributes to the existing body of literature on family language policy by adding more nuance to the contextual and fluid nature of language decisions in bilingual families.

The objectives of this study are to investigate the way the bilingual families decide their own language policy through the components of language policy, the way the parents apply language policy to succeed their children words production, and to find out the factors why the parents apply the language policy the way they are. This research applied qualitative approach by phenomenology term through observation, questionnaire and in–depth interview. The research findings showed that bilingual families use the components of language policy namely language ideology, language practice and language management. Mostly parents considered language ideology and language management. Otherwise, language practice were not applied by them completely, it can be seen through language that their children use will be different with what the parents have expected. Language policy is applied in family by practicing the language directly. There are some influences that make the parents practice the language directly, namely: influences of outside home and there is no balance guidance of practicing language between mother and father. Factors that support parents in conducting language policy are intermarriage, maintaining the language particularly tribal language, the position of language using in formal context such as school and the position of language which is used in their environment. Keywords: Bilingual families; Language policy; and Word Production.

Household Perspectives on Minority Language Maintenance and Loss: Language in the Small Spaces

This paper focuses on the micro-level of language policy and aims to point out the critical role of family language policy (FLP) in language maintenance/shift of minority/heritage home language(s) and childhood bilingualism. FLP could resist broader language ideologies by transforming parents’ language ideologies and attitudes into language practices and language management that support the development of active or additional childhood bilingualism. Through a research into the interdisciplinary components of FLP, this paper aims to illustrate aspects of multilevel and dynamic relationships between each of these core components. An introduction to FLP as a research field is included as well as some of the studies that spotlighted the way parental agency in regard to each of the three FLP components could shape, explicitly or implicitly, language use and planning for the minority/heritage home language(s).

1. Beginnings John Macalister & Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi Part I: Challenges in Family Language Policy 2. Family Language Policy: New Directions Cassie Smith-Christmas 3. Family Language Policy for Deaf Children and the Vitality of New Zealand Sign Language Rachel McKee & Kirsten Smiler 4. Family Language Practices as Emergent Policies in Child-Headed Households in Rural Uganda Maureen Kendrick & Elizabeth Namazzi 5. Exploring Family Language policies Among Azerbaijani-Speaking Families in the City of Tabriz, Iran Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi 6. The Role of the Zapotec Language from Lozoga' in the Californian Migrant Community Daisy Bernal Lorenzo 7. Adrift in an Anglophone World: Refugee Families' Language Policy Challenges Diego Navarro & John Macalister PART II: Opportunities in Family Language Policy 8. How Religious Ideologies and Practices Impact on Family Language Policy - Ethiopians in Wellington Melanie Revis 9. I speak all of the language!: Engaging in Family Language Policy Research with Multilingual Children in Montreal Alison Crump 10. Dynamic Family Language Policy: Heritage Language Socialization and Strategic Accommodation in the Home Corinne Seals 11. Language Ideologies, Social Capital, and Interaction Strategies: AN ethnogrpah8ic Case Study of Family Language Policy in Singapore Guangwei Hu & Li Ren PART III: Consequences for Family Language Policy 12. Home: A Confluence of Discourses in Multilingual Linguistic Ecologies Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi & John Macalister

This article presents an in-depth, small-scale qualitative study of a Hebrew-Russian bilingual family with 8 children, and compares the parents' perspective on the family language policy with their children's evaluation of it. Spolsky's (2004, 2009) model of language policy enables tracing the development of the parents' language ideology and management, and unveils discrepancies between the parents' conscious efforts to transmit the heritage language and the actual language practice in the family. The study also refers to a structural contact-linguistic analysis (Myers-Scotton, 2002) of the child-parent bilingual discourse and its implications for family language policy. In the practical aspect, the results of the case study may be instructive to minority parents committed to maintenance of a heritage language in their families.

This paper explored crucial factors to achieve sustainable development of early language education by examining the relationship between two dimensions of family language policy—language ideologies and language practices—as well as the relationship between family language policy and the development of children’s narrative macrostructure. Data were collected via a language performance test and a questionnaire survey of 131 kindergartners from 10 kindergartens in a Chinese city. Structural equation modeling corroborated the relationship between family language ideologies and family language practices proposed by family language policy theorists. Results showed that family language policy significantly predicted kindergarteners’ development of narrative macrostructure. In addition, age was shown to be a significant predictor of narrative macrostructure development, whereas gender was not. Implications for early intervention of children’s narrative macrostructure development were discussed.

ABSTRACTInformed by family language policy (FLP) as the theoretical framework, I illustrate in this paper how language ideologies can be incongruous and language policies can be conflicting through three multilingual families in Singapore representing three major ethnic groups – Chinese, Malay and Indian. By studying their family language audits, observing their language practices, and engaging in conversations about their language ideologies, I look at what these families do and do not do and what they claim to do and not to do. Data were collected over a period of 6 months with more than 700 minutes of recording of actual interactions. Analysis of the data reveals that language ideologies are ‘power-inflected’ and tend to become the source of educational and social tensions which in turn shape family language practices. In Singapore these tensions are illustrated by the bilingual policy recognising mother tongues (MTs) and English as official languages, and its educational policy establishing English as the medium of instruction. The view of English as having instrumental values and MTs as having cultural functions reveals that language choices and practices in family domains are value-laden in everyday interactions and explicitly negotiated and established through FLP.

This study investigated the family language environment of the Miao ethnic group in southwestern China to understand the preservation of the Miao language through the lens of family language policy (FLP). The household members’ language ideologies, practices and management were examined. The findings revealed that: (1) Perceptions of Putonghua and the Miao language, shaped by household members’ deprived life experiences and connection to ethnic roots respectively, have led to a FLP characterised by differentiated language ideologies with a pro-Putonghua orientation; (2) In alignment with these language ideologies, household members substantially facilitated Putonghua practices while kinship relations still sustained Miao language practices within the family space; (3) While the formation of language ideologies and language practices were congruent to their constitutions as understood via FLP, the drifting management efforts identified could possibly jeopardise good preservation of the home language in question. In particular, this study revealed the potential influence of co-residing extended family members in the process of Miao language shift or maintenance. A comprehensive management approach, mirroring the strategies for Putonghua adoption, was proposed to enhance the preservation of minority languages.

This qualitative case study explores the multiple forces driving the development of language ideologies within a multi-generation ethnic Mongolian family in mainland China and its family language policy (FLP) implementation. The findings reflect changes in family members’ language proficiency, ideologies, and practices across generations, per the influence of state education and language policy, the changing national-level socioeconomic and political environment and globalisation. The findings suggest the multiple factors that influence and shape FLP. It is found that conflicts and contradictions exist among family members’ language ideologies, language management and language practices, driven by the dual position of the Mongolian language’s decline (due to its lack of involvement in globalisation) and revival (due to national-level efforts to enhance cohesion). Presenting a nuanced and holistic understanding of FLP, this study relates the Mongolian family’s FLP to wider educational, historical and sociocultural realities. The implications for different stakeholders are discussed.

This inquiry examines how family languages policies (FLP) are planned and developed in twenty bilingual families in Singapore with regard to their children’s Chinese language and literacy development. The study focuses on how parents perceive Chinese and how their beliefs are transformed into active language practices. Data sources include de facto language practices in home domains, parents’ language ideologies, and literacy activities and private tuition used as their language management. The findings reveal that all parents hold an unambiguous belief in the benefits of developing Chinese language, both in terms of cultural identity and in terms of providing overt socioeconomic opportunities. The study shows that FLPs are constantly interacting with and shaped by nonlinguistic forces – the national language policy and the educational system. When facing the sociopolitical and educational realities in Singapore, these parents are coerced to place Chinese and English into a dichotomous position resulting in lower expectations for their children’s Chinese proficiency and less sufficient provision of Chinese literacy resources.

The few studies on Family Language Policy in Singapore (FLP) have generally focused on FLP in local and immigrant Chinese families. This article explores language policies that seem to undergird Singaporean-Japanese families’ language practices. In-depth interviews and observations with five such families showed that Japanese only functions as the language of communication between the Japanese parents and their children if parents have invoked particular language policies to support its transmission and use at home. For most families, English was the main medium of communication among family members. Language policies and practices in these families were heavily influenced by the value emplaced on each language within the parents’ linguistic repertoire and their beliefs regarding language learning.