The Interrelationship of Family Language Policies, Emotions, Socialisation Practices and Language Management Strategies

Abstract

Multilingual families in immigrant/minority language contact settings face various challenges that are related to their affective and emotional domains, as well as to their well-being. This study investigated the interrelationship of the family language policies (FLPs), emotions, socialisation practices and language management strategies of immigrant Russian and mixed-marriage families in Cyprus. The participants were eighty multilingual families from low-middle-high socio-economic backgrounds, including two-and one-parent families who resided in rural or in urban areas. Forty were mixed-marriage (Russian wife and Greek Cypriot husband) families and 40 were Russian-speaking (both spouses Russian) immigrant families who resided in Cyprus. Data sources included a questionnaire about the families' general backgrounds, the parents' socio-economic status, their linguistic behaviour and their children's language proficiency, and semi-structured interviews with the mothers focused on their FLP, home language development and socio-emotional well-being. An analysis of the diverse family types revealed both differences and similarities amongst Russian speakers in Cyprus and their FLPs. Russian speakers incorporated a wide range of language repertoires in their everyday lives. Multilingualism and the maintenance of the Russian language and culture were usually encouraged, as was the development of the children's Russian-language literacy, and the parents often used the one-parentone-language (OPOL) approach at home. In many cases, FLPs were characterised by translanguaging to enhance dynamic multilingualism and emotional well-being at home. However, not all of the efforts resulted in successful language transmission, which may have been due to individual and/or societal differences and family configurations.

The Role of Age Variables in Family Language Policy

“…FLP is a dynamic framework, connecting language policy and child development (Karpava 2022). To understand its formation, the sociolinguistic, socioeconomic, sociopolitical, and sociocultural contexts, as well as the home environment, parental background, and economic resources, should be considered (Curdt-Christiansen and Huang 2020).…”

“…Family language policy (FLP) encompasses the language beliefs and planning employed by families to guide language use within the home (Hollebeke et al 2020). It serves as a link between two fields of study: language policies and bilingual language outcomes of children (Karpava 2022). Subsequently, FLP is considered necessary for heritage language development (Caldas 2012;Dekeyser and Stevens 2019;Romanowski 2021;Spolsky 2004Spolsky , 2012.…”

Family Language Policies of Multilingual Families during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Cyprus, Estonia, Germany, Israel, and Sweden

“…The family language policy (FLP) involves ideologies and approaches to how languages are managed, learned, and negotiated within individual families (Schwartz 2010;Curdt-Christiansen and Huang 2020). FLP research is interdisciplinary, and it takes into consideration both internal and external factors (King and Fogle 2013;Spolsky 2019;Hollebeke et al 2020;Karpava 2022a). In particular, the internal factors include language management strategies in the family and their implicit and explicit language choices; parental expectations, attitudes, and efforts for HL maintenance and transmission; affective domain; the role of child agency and communication with siblings and relatives.…”

Linguistic anxiety, insecurity, and fulfilment of bilingual parenting: Emotional complexities experienced by Chinese immigrant families

“…The formulation of FLP distinctly aligns with "orientations towards emotional exchanges, intimacy, and family-bound affection, as well as orientations towards trajectories of success and mobility" (Sevinç & Mirvahedi, 2023, p. 146). Given the critical role of emotionality within FLP, emotional domains should be investigated to better account for transnational families' language planning, multilingual practices, educational desires, intergenerational relations, social connections, and psychosocial wellbeing (Karpava, 2022;Sevinç & Mirvahedi, 2023).…”