LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND LANGUAGE SHIFT
Language Maintenance and Language Shift in Crimean
Immigrants’ Children in the United States of America
Abdureim I. Abdurashytov
Near East University
ELT- 516
18 January 2013
Nicosia
1.
Introduction
1.1
Background
Throughout history of Crimeans (or Crimeantatars) we can observe that
immigrations to the United States began in the late 1950-s. Several Crimeans
migrated to the U.S. with their families and children. However, nowadays the
total population of the Crimean Diaspora in the U.S. about seven thousand (U.S.
Census, 2010) many of them reside in the Brooklyn-Queens section of New York.
Moreover, the percentage of Crimeans in the U.S. is increasing over the year.
The main focus of this research is Crimean immigrants’ language use within
Crimean community with (family, relatives, and Crimean peers at school). Since,
in Crimean peninsula Crimean (or Crimeantatar) language fatal underwent and
still undergoing influence of Russian as a dominant language. Especially we
observe this tendency among young generation. Although Crimeans readily admit
that their mother tongue is Crimean, Russian remains the main language of
communication. For instance, many Crimean children speak Russian among
themselves.
1.2 Literature Review
Holmes
(2001) states that using a minority language in a predominantly monolingual
culture and society could be shifted over a period of ten years. However, it
should be mentioned that language shifting may differ for different individuals
and different groups. Migrants’ families are example to this language shifting
process.
In country like United States, one of the first domains in which children of
migrant families meet English is the school (Holmes, 2001). They may read news
papers in English, watch television but at school they are expected to interact
in English. Moreover, they are challenged to English because it is the only
means of communicating with the teachers and other children. Consequently, for
many children of migrants, English soon becomes the normal language for talking
to other peers- including their brothers and sisters (Holmes, 2001). More to
the point, in many families English become a primarily spoken language
(Creswell, 2003).
We can also observe some pressures of society too (Holmes, 2001). “Immigrants
who look and sound “different” are often regarded as threatening by majority
group members” (as cited in Harris, 2006, p. 52). For example, language shift
to English, has often expected of migrants in predominantly monolingual
countries such as England, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand.
Speaking good English has been a sign of successful assimilation and it was
widely assumed that meant abandoning the minority language (Holmes, 2001). This
process could extend three or four generations but occasionally language shift
is completed in just two generations (Holmes, 2001). In fact, migrants are
typically monolingual in their mother tongue, their children are bilingual, and
their grandchildren are often monolingual in the language of the “host” country
(Holmes, 2001).
There is no research on Crimean minority group of America to be mentioned.
Thus, I would like to fill up this gap and to contribute to this area by
current study.
2. Aim
This research aims
to investigate Crimean Tatar immigrant children’s use of their mother tongue
and English in communication with people of the same ethnic group. The study
will investigate whether and how Crimean Tatar children maintain their mother tongue
or shift to L2 in family and school environment.
2.1 Questions
The
study will be guided by the following research questions:
·Do
Crimean Tatar children know their native language, and if yes, what is their
level of proficiency?
·Do
Crimean Tatar children know English, and if yes, what is their level of
proficiency?
·What
are Crimean Tatar children’s attitudes towards Crimean and towards English?
·What
language do Crimean children prefer to use in communication with their parents
and grandparents at home?
·What
language do the children prefer to use in communication with their Crimean
Tatar peers at home?
·What
language do Crimean children prefer to use in communication with their Crimean
Tatar peers at school?
·Do
Crimean Tatar children use code switching and code mixing when communicating
with other Crimean Tatars? If yes, in what situations and why?
·Can
language shift be observed in young generation in Crimean Tatar emigrant
families?
·What
are the factors that lead to language maintenance or language shift of Crimean
Tatar children in emigration?
·Do
parents influence their children’s use of L1 and L2? Do they support language
maintenance or encourage their children to assimilate with the English-speaking
majority?
2.2 Design
An
ethnographic approach will be adopted. Using ethnographic method we can find
out the meaning of behavior, language, and interaction of the cultural-sharing
group (Creswell, 1997) by immersing in the day-to-day lives of the people.
Holmes (2001) states that using a minority language in a predominantly
monolingual culture and society could be shifted over a period of ten years.
However, it should be mentioned that language shifting may differ for different
individuals and different groups. Migrant families are example to this language
shifting process. The research involves in extensive work in the field, called
fieldwork, gathering fruitful data. As Wolcott (1996) comments, “They
[researchers] establish what a stranger would have to know in order to understand
what is going on here or, more challenging still, what a stranger would have to
know in order to be able to participate in a meaningful way” (p. 6). The
ethnographer should be good at dealing with fieldwork issues (Creswell, 1997).
Thus, an ethnographic research will enable me to investigate how children of
Crimean maintain their mother tongue or shift to L2 in family and school
environment.
The design will not
follow the (sequential) phases of data collection and data analysis. Rather,
data collection and data analysis will be at the same time (concurrently)
(Creswell, 2003).
2.3 Sample
The
research will be based on school context with comparison out-of-school context
and home context. Using different data sources of information this triangulation
(Creswell, 2003) can result in well-validated and substantiated findings.
It is considered to
recruit 20 participants. Among these participants ten of them are children from
secondary school whose parents must be native speaker of Crimean. And, ten
parents of those children will be involved in collecting data, in order to find
out if there is any influence of parents to children’s use of L1 and L2. The
proportion of male and female will be randomly selected.
2.4 Methods
The current study will
utilize first-hand participant observation within the contexts (McNeill, 1985)
which allows researchers to more directly experience aspects of the situation
context. Also, the recording of participants’ naturally occurring talk, and
open ended interviews to pursue their views and understanding towards the
Crimean language. All these methods enable us to gain insights about the social
practice within which language is embedded, and the influence of contextual
factors both within and beyond the school.
2.5 Analysis
Data
will be analyzed using form of linguistic discourse analysis (Maybin, 2009).
Discourse analysis is concerned with spoken language, content, and function.
And, the ways shared understanding is developed, in social context, over time
(Mercer, 2010).
3. Ethics
As
a researcher, I’m going to conduct “covert” research (McNeill, 1985) that is I
will not let children know what I’m doing. Therefore, I will tell them that I’m
writing a book, even if it is note purely frank. But, at the same time I will
obtain informed consent from their parents.
The anonym of
participants will be provided if it is necessary.
3.1 Outcomes
The study will
provide clear understanding of the Crimeans children attitudes towards Crimean
language. After that it will shed light upon issue of young children
preferences in language selection in and out-of-school context. Consequently,
we can notice if there any language shift takes place.
This study may be of
a great use for new Crimean immigrants that might want to be aware or
understand the problems their children would encounter while integrating in the
U.S. society.
3.2 Timeline
First
3 months: carrying out design and one literature review. 4 months: fieldwork,
data gathering and data analysis. Last 3 months: Conclusion, final thoughts and
submission.
References
Creswell, J. W. (1997). Qualitative
inquiry and research design. Thausand Oaks, CL: Sage Publication,
Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research
design. Thausand Oaks, CL: Sage Publication, Inc.
Holmes, J. (2001). An
introduction to sociallinguistics. Malaysia, LSP: Pearson Education.
Maybin, J. (2009). A
broader view of language in school: Research from linguistic ethnography. Children
& Society, 23, 70-78. doi:10.1111/j.1099-0860.2008.00177.x
Mercer, N. (2010). The
analysis of classroom talk: Methods and methodologies. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 80, 1-14. doi: 10.1348/000709909X479853
McNeill, P. (1985). Reasearch
methods. New York, NY: Tavistock Publication.
Pawluch, D., Shaffir W.,
& Miall, C. (2005). Doing ethnography . Toronto, Ontario: Canadian
Scholars’ Press Inc.
Оставьте свой комментарий
Авторизуйтесь, чтобы задавать вопросы.