Emotion in multivarietal family language policy in Flanders

Abstract

Aims: This study on Belgian Dutch caregivers aims to complement research on multilingual family language planning with a multivarietal perspective. As transitions between varieties are often more gradual, it is revealing to study which emotions surface in caregivers’ reflection on these varieties. The Belgian Dutch case is selected given its historically highly emotional macro-level language debate, its exoglossic norm and its transition from diglossia to diaglossia. Methodology: The aim is pursued through mixed methodology, combining variationist analysis with a bottom-up discourse analytic approach. Data and analysis: We juxtapose data from two Belgian Dutch families. For each family, a qualitative analysis identifies the expressions of (the lack of) emotions found in metalinguistic interviews on varieties of Dutch with the caregivers (80’). This information is triangulated with a quantitative analysis of the caregivers’ use of standard and nonstandard pronouns of address in self-recorded dinner table conversations (260’; N = 1004). Findings: Results reveal caregivers’ attempts to manage conflicting emotions related to the Flemish language situation, and how they lead to (dis)harmony in the family. Originality: This paper contributes to our understanding of emotions in family language policy (FLP) in its focus on a multivarietal context and in its mixed methodology. Implications: Our findings resonate with research on multilingual FLP’s, which we tie to caregivers’ diglossic description of the diaglossic Flemish context. The shifting relationship between emotions expressed in the interviews and the language choices made in practice, overall support the value of mixed methods FLP research.

Primary school children's conflicted emotions about using their heritage languages in multilingual classroom tasks

“…This “anxious” relation between the use of Dutch and French, as well as a certain level of intolerance within Flanders to cultural and linguistic diversity (Blommaert & Verschueren, 1998), has engendered problematic relationships with immigration, creating a kind of spill‐over effect that causes negative feelings and reactions against almost all ethnic minority languages (Jaspers, 2011). Furthermore, the complex identification process and emotional connectedness between Flemish and their official language Dutch (Naborn et al., 2022) adds to educational policy stakeholders’ layered response toward the use of other languages in education (Jaspers, 2011). In everyday communication, most Flemings would use a variety of Dutch that is labeled tussentaal (literally, in‐between language)—a less formal and standardized variety.…”