“I’m a Heritage Speaker of the Damascene Dialect of Arabic”: Negotiating the Identity Label of Arabic Heritage Language Learner

Utilizing an ecological perspective of heritage language learner (HLL) identity (Hornberger & Wang, 2008), this study investigates how an underexamined group within HLL studies—language learners with diverse ties to the Arabic language—perceive the label of HLL and how they position themselves and their classmates relative to this label during interviews and in an advanced Arabic language classroom. I draw on interview, observational, and videotaped classroom interaction data collected as part of a larger ethnographic study of this classroom community and show how a priori educational labels assigned to these students did not always match with their self-concepts and ignored the nuances of their relationship to the umbrella term “Arabic.” These labels also affected students’ classroom roles, self-esteem, and participation in the classroom. I examine the implications of educational classifications and assigned identities that are constructed by stakeholders such as researchers, teachers, or administrators, rather than negotiated by the language learners themselves, and critique Arabic HLL as an identity and educational classification. Finally, I offer some suggestions for how to engage language learners (HLLs if they choose to identify themselves as such) in critical discussions about their relationship with the language of study.

Arabic Should Not Be Cast As Heritage: Arabic Lives

Language acquisition research often conceives of language learners in terms of linguistic proficiency and perhaps assigns them a position on a continuum with the native speaker at one end and the foreign language learner on the other. The heritage language learner falls somewhere between these two extremes and often shares a deep affiliation with the language that can be ethnically, historically, culturally or religiously driven or they may share a multifaceted affiliation with the language. Arabic heritage language learners typically include Arabs of any religious or non-religious affiliation and non-Arab Muslims. Research has considered various matters associated with Arabic heritage language learners that range from differences in their motivations to language maintenance within communities. However, research on Arabic has not really considered the implications of the term heritage itself. This paper will critically examine the term heritage language learner and argue that it is problematic due to the inherent implications of the word “heritage” which can contribute to the perpetuation of linguistic hegemony and result in language loss. Consequently, the paper recommends the use of alternative terms.

Heritage Language Education and Identity in the United States

ABSTRACTDespite the frequent references to identity within the field of heritage language education, it is only in the past decade or so that scholars have begun to conduct empirical research on this topic. This article examines recent research on identity and heritage language education in the United States. The article begins with a discussion of the simultaneous development of heritage language education as a field and growth of interest in identity and language learning, followed by a critical examination of the terms “heritage language” and “heritage language education,” as well as of “heritage language learner” as an identity category. Next is a review of empirical studies conducted within the past 5 years, including survey-based research that considered identity in the exploration of students’ reasons for heritage language study, in addition to qualitative and ethnographic research that focused specifically on heritage language learners’ sense of themselves and their relationship to the heritage language, as well as on the ways that heritage language learner identities are constructed, indexed, and negotiated in classroom settings. The next section looks at recent research on pedagogical approaches designed to engage heritage language learners in critical considerations of language and identity. The article concludes with suggestions for future research.