‘Everything comes with a price … ’; family language policy in Israeli Arab families in mixed cities

Transnational Multilingual Families in China: Multilingualism as Commodity, Conflict, and In-Betweenness

“…In these instances, languages, and therefore multilingualism, come to be viewed as commodities and treated as “an objective skill, acquired and possessed, that affords status, recognition legitimacy, and ultimately material remuneration, to those who possess it” (Block, 2017, p. 126). Due to this commodification, some multilingual profiles (based on a particular combination of languages) may be perceived as affording their speakers a higher status than do others (Gogonas & Kirsch, 2018; see also Tannenbaum & Yitzhaki, 2016).…”

“…The dearth of studies that have taken into account the multilingual identity of TMF participants (in a way that does not reduce to this merely their knowledge of three or more languages) forms part of a larger research gap concerning TMFs and their language planning, one where their language ideologies have often been explored without much attention being paid to variables like gender, emotions, and social class, as some researchers have pointed out (e.g., Gomes, 2018). Studies like those conducted by Tannenbaum (2012) and Tannenbaum and Yitzhaki (2016) are exceptions in this respect because they expand on the language planning concept to focus not only on particular languages but on how certain families use their languages as an emotional response to sociopolitical conditions or as a defense mechanism. Yet, even in these studies, like in most others (e.g., Kwon, 2020; Oriyama, 2016; for an extensive review of FLP studies involving TMFs, see Duff, 2015; Gomes, 2018; Hirsch & Lee, 2018; Lanza & Lexander, 2019), the participating families tend to be monoethnic and even functionally monolingual (at least with each other), and the findings concern the speaking of one or another language without a deeper engagement with the participants’ multilingualism (see Kozminska & Hua, 2021).…”

“…Yet, even in these studies, like in most others (e.g., Kwon, 2020; Oriyama, 2016; for an extensive review of FLP studies involving TMFs, see Duff, 2015; Gomes, 2018; Hirsch & Lee, 2018; Lanza & Lexander, 2019), the participating families tend to be monoethnic and even functionally monolingual (at least with each other), and the findings concern the speaking of one or another language without a deeper engagement with the participants’ multilingualism (see Kozminska & Hua, 2021). For instance, in the study by Tannenbaum and Yitzhaki (2016, pp. 576–577), one parent remarks, “We live in two languages.…”

Norsk som digitalt samhandlingsspråk i fire familier med innvandrerbakgrunn – identitet og investering

“…Noen migranter oppfordrer barna til å laere og bruke det dominerende språket i landet de har flyttet til på bekostning av nedarvingsspråk, for at de skal lykkes med skolegang og arbeid (da Costa Cabral, 2018). En konsekvens av dette kan vaere at også naerhet mellom barn og foreldre uttrykkes på andrespråket, og et ambivalent syn på språkkompetansen i dette språket oppstår, saerlig når det oppleves som at det gir svakere ferdigheter i førstespråket (Tannenbaum & Yitzhaki, 2016). King (2013) påpeker at barn og foreldre definerer seg selv, sine roller i familien og familielivet med hensyn til språkkompetanse: familiemedlemmene får status etter hvor godt de snakker og skriver ulike språk.…”

“…Dette kan ses på som en markert vending tilbake til norsk, som hovedspråk for deres samhandling, eller som at far Sagna synes norsk er det mest naerliggende språket å si «Glad i deg» på. Ofte er det førstespråket som brukes til dette i en flerspråklig familie, men når foreldrene fokuserer på andrespråkslaering, kan språkvalget skifte (Tannenbaum & Yitzhaki, 2016). I både familien Diagne og Sagna går små lommer av ømhet og språksosialisering hånd i hånd i en ellers travel hverdag.…”