Heritage Languages and Language Policy

Abstract

The term heritage language (HL) was first used in the Canadian context to refer to any “language other than English and French,” and intended to reference the languages spoken by indigenous (First Nation) people or by immigrants (Cummins, 1991, pp. 601–2). Clyne (1991) modified the definition for the Australian context to include any language other than English (LOTE). US researchers and policy‐makers adopted this version in subsequent years.

Defining an “ideal” heritage speaker: Theoretical and methodological challenges Reply to peer commentaries

“…Indeed, the problem of defining and identifying heritage speakers is well-known in the literature (Beaudrie and Fairclough 2012, de Bot and Gorter 2005, Carreira 2004, Carreira and Kagan 2011, Fishman 2001, He 2010, Hornberger and Wang 2008, King and Ennser-Kananen 2013, Polinsky and Kagan 2007, Van Deusen-Scholl 2003; to date, all of the definitions advanced have been appropriate for the specific context and communities they describe, yet hard to apply beyond that. As Carreira (2004) puts it, we do not have a "size that fits all" when it comes to defining or characterizing heritage speakers-this is why most articles about heritage speakers spend a significant portion of their introductory sections discussing issues concerning the label 'heritage speaker' and connotations of that term.…”

Heritage language use and maintenance in multilingual communities

“…As King and Ennser-Kananen (2013) point out, despite the long-standing claim for HL teacher training, there is still a scarcity of programmes to prepare HL teachers, and a growing recognition that these teachers would be ideally suited to educate HL learners. Teacher educators should capitalize on prospective HL teachers' funds of linguistic and cultural knowledge (Cho 2014).…”

“…In fact, Sweden is the only country where all immigrant students are entitled to HL tuition. Language policy in the USA for HLs has expanded in the last decade, as King and Ennser-Kananen (2013) explain, once it has become apparent that educating HL speakers primarily -if not exclusively -in English and later on, at the secondary or tertiary level, instructing them in the HL through a foreign-language approach has neither been appropriate nor successful. Furthermore, after 9/11, the linguistic competence of HL communities in the USA -particularly in given strategic languages such as Arabic -came to be seen as a national resource and funding was earmarked for their promotion.…”

“…Immigration waves in many parts of Europe and the USA have contributed to increasing the linguistic and cultural diversity of these continents through the spread of various HLs and cultures. As King and Ennser-Kananen (2013) note, the term HL is often used to designate the language used in home and familial contexts, even though some authors point to its wider cultural associations and significance. In this vein, Carreira (2004) argues that identity, language and family background should be taken into account when defining HL learners.…”

Documenting the diversity of learner achievements in Asian languages using common measures

“…In the US, by far the largest group of heritage learners are Latinos, but other language communities including Korean and Chinese are also receiving increasing attention and have been the subject of published research (treated in more detail in the final two papers in this issue by Kim and Scrimgeour). Federal language policy initiatives have given greater explicit attention to these learners than is the case in Australia, particularly since 9/11, when it was recognized that the nation's existing linguistic resources needed to be harnessed in the interests of national security (King & Ennser-Kananen, 2012). In addition, many US university programs offer specialist study tracks for heritage languages learners (Kondo- Brown, 2008) in contrast to Australia, where the distinction between different types of learner is seldom explicitly drawn.…”