Attitudes towards Cypriot Greek and Standard Modern Greek in London’s Greek Cypriot community

Καρατσαρέας, Πέτρος

doi:10.1177/1367006918762158

Cited by 20 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further findings point to positive parental attitudes being directly associated with more successful maintenance (Hashimoto & Lee, 2011). Our results also agree with Polinsky (2011) and Karatsareas (2018) who report a similar positive stance among their participants towards their HL. Carreira and Kagan (2011: 48) found that most of their students had "largely positive feelings and experiences" with their HL.…”

Section: Profiles Identifies and Needs Of Greek Heritage Speakerssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Carreira and Kagan (2011: 48) investigated HL learners' attitudes towards their HL and found that most of the students had "largely positive feelings and experiences" with their HL. Similar results were reported by Polinsky (2011), but also by Karatsareas (2018) who found a positive attitude among the members of the Greek-Cypriot Community in London towards their HL.…”

Section: Attitudes Towards the Hlsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…As far as Greek HLSs (GHLSs) are concerned, even though there are a considerable number of them in the U.S., Australia, and Canada, they are still in uncharted territory. Only recent research (Aravossitas 2016;Gardner-Chloros, 2009;Gavriilidou & Mitits, 2019;Karatsareas, 2018Karatsareas, , 2019 has documented the linguistic competency and sociolinguistic characteristics of Greek or Cypriot-Greek HSs, so there is an urgent need to collect more data from GHLSs around the world in order to delineate their characteristics, investigate their identities, and address specific educational requirements stemming from their needs. Otherwise, as research on other HLs has shown, heritage Greek is faced with a loss of language contact and a pending language death with every subsequent generation of HLSs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Socio-linguistic Profiles, Identities, and Educational Needs of Greek Heritage Language Speakers in Chicago

Gavriilidou

Mitits

2021

JLE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aims to further the research on heritage language speakers (HLSs) by providing the socio-linguistic profiles and identities of an uninvestigated community of heritage speakers, namely the Greeks of Chicago, thus offering data for a less-studied HL, Greek. The participants were fifty-four (N=54) first, second, and third-generation Greek HLSs. The socio-linguistic data were collected through an online survey, while identification with Greek culture as well as ethnic attachment and practice of Greek traditions were investigated through the content analysis of data from the Greek Heritage Language Corpus. The results of the study are discussed with respect to how they can improve our knowledge of the educational needs of Greek HL learners. This research-based knowledge can be employed for addressing the academic needs of HL learners through educational programs. The authors propose an agenda for a more linguistically and culturally responsive education program for HL learners, in general, and Greek HL learners in diasporic communities, in particular.

show abstract

Section: Profiles Identifies and Needs Of Greek Heritage Speakerssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Attitudes Towards the Hlsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Socio-linguistic Profiles, Identities, and Educational Needs of Greek Heritage Language Speakers in Chicago

Gavriilidou

Mitits

2021

JLE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Widely accepted in Ukraine as a communicative tool, Russian is viewed very negatively by some older migrants and their descendants in the UK, even though all groups share the attachment to Ukrainian as a marker of their Ukrainian identity. Similar tensions are identified by Karatsareas (2018) in the Greek-speaking community of London, where Cypriot Greek is perceived by some as 'villagey' (Karatsareas 2018, 13), and in which Standard Modern Greek is the only variety taught in complementary schools where children are taught their community language. Teachers may correct heritage speakers when they use Cypriot Greek features; the use of Cypriot Greek features is also discouraged in informal settings, including the home.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Language standards, standardisation and standard ideologies in multilingual contexts

McLelland

2020

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essaywhich also serves as an introduction to the six other articles in this special issueexamines the development of the field of language standardisation studies in recent decades. First, it notes the change in focus occasioned by drawing on the notion of language ideologies, especially standard language ideology. That ideological awakening has, in turn, revealed that standardisation studies have, until recently, been largely ideologically monolingualist. I argue that we must consider multilingualism (broadly conceived) in at least five ways when we study language standardisation: to recognise diaglossia within a single named language; to understand the nature of polycentric standards; to analyse language purism; to appreciate the key role of (foreign/ second) language learning in codification; and to trace the transmission of ideologies across languages and cultures. The paper gives examples of the ways in which our research can be unwittingly monolingualist in its concepts and methods, and examines the role of the concepts of heteroglossia and translanguaging in challenging that monolingualism. It concludes by setting an agenda for third-wave standardisation studies, with a call for standardisation studies that are enriched both by the ideological turn and by attending to multilingualism.

show abstract

“…Research on language attitudes has primarily focused on the attitudes towards standard and nonstandard language varieties (Dragojevic 2017). Karatsareas' (2018) The vitality of a language is reflected by the forces that lead to a shift in language use and in its symbolic value (Ryan, Giles & Sebastian 1982). Thus, the more a language is used as a means of communication in various social circles (inside and outside of the home) the higher its vitality.…”

Section: Linguistic History Of the Three Armenian Republics (1918-)mentioning

confidence: 99%

‘He Wasn’t Able to Understand What I Was Saying’: The Experiences of Returnees’ Speaking Western Armenian in ‘Eastern’ Armenia

Karamanian

2019

PORTAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since Armenia’s independence in 1991, thousands of diasporans have made the decision to return and settle in the ancestral homeland. The returnees, who speak Western Armenian, one of the two standardised forms of modern Armenian, are switching to the use of Eastern Armenian, the official variant of the homeland. Using two determinants of language perception—standardisation and vitality—this paper analyses the reactions received by thirty returnees who emigrated from nine countries, when speaking Western Armenian to an Eastern Armenian-speaking society. The vitality of the language shows signs of increasing through an encouragement by locals aware of the language’s historical significance, and an admiration of its ‘beauty’ and terminology. A heightened vitality has led returnees to feel confident about its use during social interactions and the possibility of the standard being incorporated into the nation’s linguistic narrative. However, confusion and ridicule due to a differing pronunciation, vocabulary, terminology, and the inability to be understood by some in Armenian society, has led to discomfort by returnees who are shifting to the usage of Eastern Armenian. At present, the use of Western Armenian in the homeland remains within the confines of family, friends and returnee circles. Despite the changing status of Western Armenian through a notable welcoming of the language into the linguistic narrative of the country, some segments of Armenian society do not perceive Western Armenian as an acceptable standard for broader use in Armenian society and national institutions. The homeland’s inconsistent, and at times questionable, acceptance of the language perpetuates the status quo that Western Armenian remains an unacceptable standard within the homeland and for use only in the diaspora.

show abstract

Attitudes towards Cypriot Greek and Standard Modern Greek in London’s Greek Cypriot community

Cited by 20 publications

References 29 publications

The Socio-linguistic Profiles, Identities, and Educational Needs of Greek Heritage Language Speakers in Chicago

The Socio-linguistic Profiles, Identities, and Educational Needs of Greek Heritage Language Speakers in Chicago

Language standards, standardisation and standard ideologies in multilingual contexts

‘He Wasn’t Able to Understand What I Was Saying’: The Experiences of Returnees’ Speaking Western Armenian in ‘Eastern’ Armenia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About