scholarly journals “No, no Maama! Say ‘Shaatir ya Ouledee Shaatir’!” Children’s agency in language use and socialisation

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 771-785 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatma Said ◽  
Hua Zhu

Aims and objectives: This paper investigates how children in multilingual and transnational families mobilise their multiple and developing linguistic repertoires creatively to assert their agency in language use and socialisation, and why these acts of agency are conducive to successful maintenance of the so-called “home”, “community” or “minority” language. Methodology: Close, qualitative analysis of mealtime multiparty conversations is carried out to examine children’s agency in language use and socialisation. Data and analysis: Twelve hours of mealtime conversations within one Arabic and English-speaking multilingual family in the UK were recorded over a period of eight months. The excerpts selected for analysis in this paper illustrate how agency is enacted in interaction. Findings: The data analyses of the family’s language practices reveal both their flexible language policy and the importance the family attaches to Arabic. The children in this family are fully aware of the language preferences of their parents and are capable of manipulating that knowledge and asserting their agency through their linguistic choices to achieve their interactional goals. Originality: This paper explores how Arabic is maintained as a minority language by second and third generations of Arabic-speaking immigrants in the UK through close analysis of conversations. Significance: The findings contribute to the current discussions of family language policy and maintenance by demonstrating children’s agentive and creative roles in language use and socialisation. Three factors are identified as the reason for the successful language learning, use and maintenance of Arabic: firstly, a family language policy that has a positive multilingual outlook; secondly, family relationship dynamics that connect and bond family members; and thirdly, the children’s highly developed ability to understand their parents’ language preferences.

Multilingua ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassie Smith-Christmas

AbstractThe aim of this article is to illustrate the fluid nature of family language policy (FLP) and how the realities of any one FLP are re-negotiated by caregivers and children in tandem. In particular, the paper will focus on the affective dimensions of FLP and will demonstrate how the same reality – in this case, a grandmother’s use of a child-centred discourse style as a means to encouraging her grandchildren to use their minority language, Scottish Gaelic – can play out differently among siblings. Using a longitudinal perspective, the paper begins by examining a recorded interaction between a grandmother, Nana,All names are pseudonyms.and her granddaughter Maggie (3;4) and will discuss how Nana’s high use of questions andlaissez-faireattitude to Maggie’s use of English contribute to the child-centred nature of the interaction, and in turn, to Maggie’s playful use of Gaelic. The paper then examines an interaction recorded five years later in which Nana interacts with Maggie’s brother Jacob (4;0) in the same affective style; however, unlike Maggie, Jacob evidences overtly negative affective stances towards his minority language. The paper concludes by discussing these observations in light of the reflexive nature of FLP in terms of emotional affect, linguistic input, and language shift.


Multilingua ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao Lan Curdt-Christiansen ◽  
Francesca La Morgia

AbstractDrawing on theories of family language policy and literacy environment, this inquiry explores and describes how family language policy is managed through literacy resources and literacy related activities in transnational families in the UK. A total of 66 families, each with at least one child between the age of 2 and 8, participated in this study. All children spoke English alongside their heritage/home language (HL), either Chinese, Italian, or Urdu. Data sources include: (a) a questionnaire about the children’s general background and the parents’ socio-economic and cultural capital and language practice in English and HL; (b) literacy resources and activities in both HL and English; (c) interview with parents. The results of this study show some interesting differences among Italian, Urdu and Chinese speakers, not only in their family language practices, but also in their attitudes towards mother tongue literacy and application of literacy practices in the home language. Although parental language management efforts were motivated by their aspirations to enrich their children’s language repertoires, the different degrees of variation in family language input indicate that sociocultural and socio-political realities present difficulties and constraints that prevent families from developing literacy in the home language.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document