StudyingParentalAttitudes toIntergenerationalTransmission
ofaHeritageLanguage:Polish inRegensburg
HannaPułaczewska

Abstract Thestudyattemptstosystematicallyrelatefamilylanguagepolicies,their perceptionofsocialpressures,andparents’axiologicalstances.Theobjectiveisto provideanempiricalaccountofvarianceinparentingstylesandassociatedfamily languagepoliciesofPolish-speakingparentsinRegensburg,Germany.Thedata consistedofinterviewsconductedwith20immigrantPolish-speakingmothersof teenagerslivinginGermanysinceinfancy.Interviewdatahavebeensubjectedto aninductiveanalysisinordertoidentifycrucialaspectsofvarianceinstancesof immigrantparents,reflectedintheobservedvarianceoftheirchildren’scompetence inPolish.Theoutcomeisatypologyofparents’axiologicalattitudestoparenting, involvingrelativeprimacyofvaluessuchaschildautonomy,childsecurity,parentchildrelation,nation,religion,andextendedfamilythataffectthedecisiononinhow farPolishisbeingpassedontochildren.Thisisfollowedbyatypologyofconative attitudestotheintergenerationaltransmissionofPolishwhichdoesnotstopatthe extenttowhichPolishiscultivatedintheinteractionwiththechild,butalsoindicates dichotomousmotivationsforsuppressionormarginalisationofPolish—submission tosocialpressureorcommunicativeadvantages.
Keywords Assimilation · Immigration · Parenting · Value Familylanguagepolicy · Bilingualism
1Introduction
Thephenomenonofpassingonaminoritylanguageinfamilieshasmainlybeen studiedinsociolinguistics,psycholinguisticsandeducationpsychologywithastrong focusonthereceivingend,thatis,onthechildwhoselanguagecompetenceisat
ThestudyhasbeensponsoredbytheNationalCentreofScience,Cracow,Poland,grantNo. 2013/10/M/HS2/00535.
H.Pułaczewska(B) PhilologicalFaculty,UniwersytetSzczeci´nski,Szczecin,Poland e-mail: hanna.pulaczewska@usz.edu.pl
©SpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG2019
B.Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk(ed.), Contacts&ContrastsinEducationalContexts andTranslation,SecondLanguageLearningandTeaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04978-2_1
stake.Itisonlywithinthelasttwodecadesthatthetopicoffamilylanguagepolicy andbilingualparentinghascometothefore,andthegrowinginterestinfamily languageideologyandpracticematerializesingrowingnumbersofdissertations andpapersinthearea(cf.King&Fogle, 2013;Schwartz, 2010 forsurveysof researchdevelopment).Theresearchquestionsaskedbysociolinguistspertainmainly toparentalsupportforL1acquisitionandsuchdifferencesbetweenparentalconcepts, ideologiesandperceptionsofsocialpressuresasleadtodifferentlanguagepractices anddifferentoutcomesforchildrengrowingupinbilingualsettings.
Thepresentpaperoffersacontributiontothisarea,reportingonhowtheintergenerationaltransmissionoftheheritagelanguage,conceivedofaspartandparcelof parentinginbilingual(ormultilingual)families,isseenthroughtheeyesofmothers forwhomPolishisthemothertongueandwhoraisetheirchildreninthecityof RegensburginsouthernGermany.Thestudyisbasedonanumberofinterviewswith motherswhohaveeitherpassedPolishontotheirteenagechildrentoagreaterora lesserextent,orhaveentirelyrefrainedfromthisendeavour.Thedatacollectedfrom theinterviewshavebeensubjectedtoaninductiveanalysis,whichhasallowedfor drawingqualitativeconclusionsfromrichandmultifacetedinputs.
Thestudyaimstopresentvariedattitudesthatparentsexhibittowardspassing onthePolishlanguagetochildrenbeingbroughtupinGermany.Weproposeto systematisethetopicoftheinterplaybetweenparentallanguagepoliciesontheone hand,andparentalperceptionsofthefunctionsoflanguage,valueandutilityofthe heritagelanguage,parentingtasks,andsocialexpectationsontheother.Themain issuesunderstudyinclude:
• value-basedparentalmotivationunderlyingpassingornotpassingonofthePolish language;
• linksbetweenattitudestointergenerationaltransmissionofPolishandattitudes towardsparenting;
• theimpactofparents’assessmentofattitudestowardspassingonPolishinawider socialenvironmentonparentaldecisionsinthisrespect;
• resultantpatternsofparentallanguagepolicies.
2AxiologicalAttitudestoParenting
Familylanguagepolicyhastypicallybeendiscussedwithafocuson“languagepolicy”ratherthan“familypolicy”,understoodasasetofforthemostpartimplicitly establishedoverarchinggoalsoflivingtogetherinthisbasicsocialunit.Depending onfamilyconstellation,suchgoalsmayincludeorfocusonindividuals,relationships existingwithinthefamilysystem,andits(ortheirs)linkstotheexternalenvironment;andbeorientedforexampletowardsself-fulfilmentoffamilymembers,family cohesionoritssocialmobilityasagroup.Childupbringing,leadingtoaparticular kindoflifeachievementforthechild(beitsocioeconomicorspiritual,intheformof
havinga“correct”worldviewandadheringtorightprinciples),islikelytobeviewed universallyasacentralfunctionofafamilyunit.
Inliteratureonintergenerationaltransmissionofheritagelanguages,thequestion ofpassingontheheritagelanguagehasusuallybeentreatedinrelativeisolationfrom theoverallorientationofparentinggoals.AccordingtoSchwartz(2010),research onfamilylanguagepolicy(FLP)incorporatesanalysisoflanguageideology,practiceandmanagement,whichwereproposedbySpolsky(2004)ascomponentsof languagepolicyinaspeechcommunity.Spolsky(2004,p.5)characterizesthem as“languagepractices—thehabitualpatternofselectingamongthevarietiesthat makeupitslinguisticrepertoire;itslanguagebeliefsorideology—thebeliefsabout languageandlanguageuse;andanyspecificeffortstomodifyorinfluencethat practicebyanykindoflanguageintervention,planningormanagement”.Schwartz (2010)believesthesamemodelcanbeappliedatthefamilyleveltoformageneral expandableframework.Yet,itseemsthatapplyingapolicymodelthatfunctionson thelevelofasocietytoaverydifferentsocialunitsuchasfamilyisnotwithout drawbacks.Inasense,itamountstomarginalisingparents’attitudestoparenting andfamilyitself.Inotherwords,adirectfocusonpractices,beliefsandattitudes towardstheheritagelanguageandbilingualismdivorces,tosomeextent,theissue ofhomelanguagechoiceandheritagelanguagesupportfromthebroaderissuesof perception,ideologyandpracticeofparentingingeneral.Thefollowingquotation fromSchwartz(1996,p.2)iswellapplicabletoindicatingpitfallsofstudyingintergenerationaltransmissionofaheritagelanguagefromtheperspectivefocusedonthe valueoftheheritagelanguageitself,whileneglectingotheraspectsoffamilygoals, personalaspirations,andsocialpercepts:
Thefocusonrelationshipswithsinglevalues(…)leadstoapiecemealaccumulationofbits ofinformationaboutvaluesthatisnotconducivetotheconstructionofcoherenttheories (…)Threenoteworthyproblemsbesettheseapproaches.First,thereliabilityofanysingle valueisquitelow(…)Second,absentacomprehensivesetofvaluesorofabroadtheory toguideselectionoftargetvalues,valuesthatwerenotincludedinastudymaybeequally ormoremeaningfullyrelatedtothephenomenoninquestionthanthosestudied(…)Third, andmostimportant,thesesingle-valueapproachesignorethewidelysharedassumptionthat attitudesandbehaviorareguidednotbytheprioritygiventoasinglevaluebutbytradeoffs amongcompetingvaluesthatareimplicatedsimultaneouslyinabehaviororattitude(…) Indeed,valuesmayplaylittleroleinbehaviorexceptwhenthereisvalueconflict—when abehaviorhasconsequencespromotiveofone(ormore)valuebutopposedtoothersthat arealsocherishedbytheperson.Itisinthepresenceofconflictthatvaluesarelikelytobe activated,toenterawareness,andtobeusedasguidingprinciples.Intheabsenceofvalue conflict,valuesmaydrawnoattention.Instead,habitual,scriptedresponsesmaysuffice.
Asfamilylanguagepolicyispartoffamilypolicy,familypsychologymightappear asanaturalsourcetoturntoinsearchofconceptstodealwiththeformer.Examples ofstudiesthatappliedcomparativepsychologicaldimensionsinstudiesofheritage languagemaintenanceareTannenbaumandHowie(2002)andPark,Tsai,Liu,and Lau(2012).Theformerusedtestsbasedonthestructural-systemictheoryoffamilies,andfoundoutthatchildren’spreferenceforusageofL1correlatespositively withtheirperceptionoftheirfamiliesascohesive.Thelatterlookedatthecorrelation betweenL1proficiencyinpre-schoolagersandtwoaspectsofparentingbehaviour
inL1,parentalresponsivenessandparentalwarmth.Suchrareexceptionsnotwithstanding,studiesonfamilylanguagepolicyareasaruledescriptiveinkindand havenottakenconsiderableinputsfromtheoreticalconceptsandmodel-theoretical approachesinpsychologyofparenting.Neitherdoestheframeworkofacculturationpsychologyfigureasmajorinputtostudiesofparentallanguagepoliciesin migrantfamilies.Berry’s(1980, 2001)seminalmodelofassimilation,integration, separation,andmarginalization(later:ambivalence)asvalue-drivenacculturation strategies,withmulticulturalism,meltingpot,segregationandexclusionactingas therespectivemirrorpoliciesofthehostsociety,hasnotbeenremarkablyutilizedby researchersstudyingparentaldecisionsonheritagelanguagemaintenance.Wecan onlyspeculateaboutthepossiblereasons,suchastheputativeobviousnessofthe relationships(L1maintenancewouldbeafacetofseparationorintegration,abandonmentafacetofassimilation,cf.Esser, 2006);littleinterestinstudyingparents whohavechosentoassimilate,orgreatdifficultyingettingtheminvolvedinresearch projects1 ;finally,agrowingawarenessthataspowerrelationsareimportant,assimilationmoreoftenthannotmeansaccommodationtodiscriminatoryarrangements anditsoppositepoleisnotseparationbutprotest,activismandclaiminglinguistic rightsforL1byconcernedparents(cf.e.g.,Chik, 2010),whichmakesBerry’smodel looklopsidedinthecontextsunderstudy.
Inanalysingourinterviewdata,wefocusedonparentalvaluesandlinksfrom valuestopractices.Weregardvaluesasthemaincomponentofattitudestoparenting,ratherthanconformtothewidelyacknowledgeddescriptionofattitudesas composedofcognitive,affectiveandconativecomponents[whichoriginatedinthe seminalstudybyRosenbergandHovland(1960)].Thisappearsadequateinview oftheobviousrelevancethatethicalconceptsandnotionssuchasgoalandtask possesswithregardtobringingupandeducatingchildren.Whilerelatedtoemotions,valuesarenotreducibletothem(cf.alsotheconceptof“value-expressive function”ofattitudesinKatz,whointroducedtheterm“attitude”intosocialpsychologyin 1937).Recognisingthatthenotionofaffectdoesnotsufficientlyaddress thoseaspectsofattitudesthatextendbeyondbeliefsabout,andbehaviouraldispositionstowardsthesubjectofattitudes,Plopa(2005)replacesthenotion“affective” by“affective-motivational”whenspeakingofattitudes.Theaffinityofvalueand motivationhasbeenemphasizedbyHumanisticSociologydevelopedbyZnaniecki (1963)andelaboratedbySmolicz(1974, 1992).Valuesarecriteriaorstandardsof orientationforselectionamongalternativesavailableingivensituations,crucialto whydifferentactorsmakedifferentchoiceseveninsimilarcircumstances.They themselvescontainacognitivecomponent(Chiro,n.d.):
Fromthesocialpsychologicalperspective,valuesareconsidered‘desirabletrans-situational goals,varyinginimportance,thatserveasguidingprinciplesinthelifeofapersonorother socialentity’(Schwartz, 1994,p.21).Accordingtothisview,valuescanbeseentofulfilfive
1 RecruitingmotherswhodonotpassthePolishlanguageonwasamajorprobleminourstudies astheygenerallydonotsubscribetosuchendeavors.Onthewhole,studiesincludingparentswho havenotattemptedtopassontheirheritagelanguagearequiterareinspiteofprominenceof intergenerationallanguagelossreportedinquantitativeresearchonmigrantcommunities.Notable exceptionsareOkita(2002),Pease-Alvarez(2003),andJa´nczak(2013).
criteria:(1)theyareconceptsorbeliefs,(2)theypertaintodesirableendstatesorbehaviours, (3)theytranscendspecificsituations,(4)theyguideselectionorevaluationofbehaviourand events,and(5)theyareorderedbyrelativeimportance(Hitlin, 2003,p.119).Thisdefinition bearsastrongaffinitywithFlorianZnaniecki’sconceptualizationoftherelationshipbetween valuesandattitudes.
Referencestoparentalvaluesindiscussiononintergenerationaltransmissionof theheritagelanguagearecommonbutdispersedand,inasense,usuallyimplicit. Spolsky(2009,p.29)referstovaluejudgementsoffamilymemberswhendiscussing languagechoice,andgivesanexampleofahouseholdthatrespectsauthorityasthe onewherelanguagechoiceislikelytofollowthewillofthepersonwithmost authority(disappointingly,heinstantlyswitchestotheissueofvaluejudgementson competinglanguagesthemselves).Thetopicofheritagelanguagebeingcherishedby parentsasavaluabletoolformaintainingkinshiptiesappearsinShepherd(2006)and Guardado(2008),whopointoutthewishforthechildrentobeabletocommunicate withtheirSpanish-speakingrelativesasthemainmotivationforHispanicparentsto passonSpanishwhilelivingintheUSAandCanada,respectively.Janssens(1987, ascitedinYang, 2008,p.2),Kasatkina(2010),Lao(2004),Lei(2007),Smolicz (1992),WongFillmore(2000),andYang(2008),tonamebutafew,claimthestatus ofapositivevalueforethnicityincludingheritagetraditionandculturethatthe maintenanceofaheritagelanguageinthefamilyhelpsuphold.Krashen(1992)argues thatspeakingintheheritagelanguageleadstoclosely-knitfamilycommunication and,inconsequence,astrongbondbetweenchildren,parents,andtheheritageculture asitenablesparentstosharetheirpersonalwisdom,familyculturalvalues,beliefs, evaluationsanddescriptionsoftheworldwiththeirchildren.Kasatkina(2010,p.44) emphasizes“theparentaldesiretomaintaintheheritagecultureandlanguage”,and indicatesthatnotpassingL1enhancesintergenerationalculturegapwhichispainful toparents(ratherthanchildren).Familycohesion,intergenerationalunderstanding, andthequalityofthetiesbetweenchildrenandparentshavealsobeenaddressed onsimilarlinesbyTannenbaum(2005).Okita(2002)isexceptionalinexposingin detailtheinterrelatednessbetweenattitudestoparentingingeneralontheonehand, andtheattitudestoheritagelanguagemaintenanceontheotherin“intermarried” JapanesemothersraisingtheirchildreninGreatBritain.
Aninductiveanalysisofourinterviewdataledustoadiscoveryofcontextuallyrelevantaspectsofdifferenceinparentingvaluesandsocialperceptions,such thatproduceddifferencesinlanguagepoliciesinthefamiliesand,accordingly,differentoutcomepotentialsforlinguisticcompetencesofthechild.Inviewofthesmall samplesizeandthemultitudeofinterferingfactors,suchasthechildren’slanguage learningaptitudeandgender,theparents’patternsofusageofPolish,theirsocial networks,educationandinterests,frequencyofvisitstoPolandetc.,inwhatfollows wedonotattempttoquantitativelyrelateparticularparentalattitudesandpractices tothechildren’slevelsofcompetenceinadirectway.Instead,wepointoutthelimitationsthatparticularparentalattitudesandtheresultinglanguagepoliciesarelikely toplaceonpossibleoutcomesofchildren’sacquisitionofPolish.
3CentralAttitudinalFactorsAffectingTransmission orNon-transmissionofPolishbyPolishMothers inRegensburg
3.1ResearchMethod
Ouranalysishasbeenconductedonthebasisoftwentysemi-structuredinterviews withPolish-speakingmothersofteenagers,aged13–18,whohavebeenbroughtup inRegensburgandhavelivedinGermanysincebirthorthefirstyearoftheirlives, withonlyoneexceptionofapersonwhoarrivedinRegensburgattheageofthree. TherespondentsthemselveswereborninPolandandcametoGermanyinadulthood (18persons)orinadolescence,accompanyingtheirownparents(2persons).
Thedecisiontoincludeonlymothersinourresearchwasmotivatedbythemuch greaterreadinessofmotherstoparticipateininterviews,andthefactthattherewere noPolish-speakingfathersinrelationshipswithnon-Polishmothersamongpotential respondents(Polish-GermancouplestypicallyconsistofaPolishwifeandaGerman husband2 ).Theinfluenceoffathersontheirchildren’supbringingisreflectedin interviewsinanindirectway,intheformofthemothers’reportsofthefathers’ attitudesandactions.
Applyingtheinductivemethodintheanalysismadeitpossibletoidentifyaspects ofparentingbilingualchildrenthatwerenotacknowledgedbyusbeforehand.A deductivecomponenthasbeenco-presentintheformofinitialassumptionsthat haveobviouslyinfluencedtheprocessofdatacollectionandmanifestedthemselves inthechoiceofthequestionsthattherespondentswereasked.
3.2GeneralCharacteristicsoftheSample
Thelinguisticandethnicstructureofthegroupreflectsthegeneralsituationof mothersofPolishoriginwholiveinGermany.Theinterviewsincludedtenmothers wholivewithPolish-speakingfathersoftheirchildren,fourmothersinrelationships withGermanpartnerswhohadnothadfamilyrelationswithPolespriortothat partnership,threemothersinpartnershipswithforeignerswhohadbeengranted Germancitizenshipasadults,twosinglemothersraisingchildrenofGermanfathers, onesinglemotherraisingthechildrenofaPolishfather,andtwosinglemothers raisingchildrenwhosefatherscamefromcountriesotherthanPolandandGermany. Elevenrespondentshadmorethanonechild.Sixoftherespondentshadsecondary educationandtwohadbasicvocationaleducation.Fromtwelverespondentsthathad university-leveleducation,fourreceivedtheirdiplomasinGermany,theothersin Poland.Manywereemployedmarkedlybelowtheirqualifications.
2 ThesameprofilewasidentifiedinstudiesonPolish-speakingfamiliesconductedatthetimein LeipzigandGreifswaldbyGretMehlhornandBernhardBrehmer.
Inordertoensurethattheinterviewsaccuratelyreflectthevarietyofparents’ attitudesandtheresultinglinguisticpractices,wetookcaretoincludemotherswhose languagepracticesvaried,andwhosechildrenconsequentlyexhibitedawholerange ofPolishlanguageskills,fromfluencytoabsenceofanylinguisticcompetence.Eight ofthetwentythreechildrenwhoweretestedforthestudyknewPolishwellorvery well,3 includingthreechildrenwithverygoodwrittenandoralcompetencewhose fathersdidnotspeakPolish.OnedyslexicchildspokePolishratherwellbutcould neitherreadnorwriteinPolish,andtwohadnoPolishlanguageskills.
TherespondentsmostlymanifestedpositiveattitudestowardsPolishlanguage transmission,whichwasreflectedintheprofilesoftheirlinguisticcommunication withthechildren.Morethanhalfofthem(10)reportedusingPolishexclusivelyor nearlyexclusively(90-100%)intheircommunicationwiththechild;fiveestimated theirPolishinputat50–80%andthreeat15–20%.Onlytworespondentsreported thattheydidnotusePolishatall.Atthetimeoftheinterviews,outofelevenPolishspeakingfatherssixusedPolishwiththeirchildrenexclusively,ornearlyexclusively, fouruseditat50–80%(includingoneGermanfatherwhohadlearnedPolishasadult), andoneat20%.
3.3AxiologicalAttitudestoParenthoodinthePolish MothersinRegensburg
Thefollowingisalistof“idealtypes”—axiologicalattitudeswhichweidentifiedon thebasisofthecollecteddata,categorisingparents’orientationsaccordingtotheir conceptofparenthoodandvaluesadheredtoinchildupbringing.Weimplement theabovequotedcontentionbySchwartzbyindicatinghowtheseattitudesinterfere with,orsupportthevalorizationoftheintergenerationaltransmissionoftheheritage language.Whiletherewasamarkedprevalenceofoneoftheseattitudesin15outof 20casesunderstudy,thestancespresentedabovearenotmutuallyexclusive.They maycoexistindifferentproportionsatonetime,anddifferinintensityatvarious stagesofthechild’sandtheparent’slives.Theymaybeintensifiedorweakenedasa resultoflifeexperience,aswellasduetothechildgrowingolderand,consequently, itsgrowingneedofautonomy,aswellasgrowingreadinessofparentstograntit thatsurfacedinourinterviews(cf.alsoCaldas&Caron-Caldas, 2002,onchanges offamilylanguagedynamicsinadolescence).
Autonomising:Acorevaluefortheparentisthechild’sautonomy.Theparent respectsthechild’sattitudesandpreferencesveryearlyinthechild’slife,perceives itasanautonomoussubjectandemphasizesrespectforitsdecisions.
Infamiliesinwhichparentsshowautonomisingattitude,itisthechildagency thatdeterminestheamountofinputinL1alreadyinearlychildhood.Thechild’s preferencesdeterminethelanguageofcommunication,aswellaswhetherother
3 Thechildrenweretestedinconversationalskills(comprehensionandproduction),readingcomprehension,spellingandreadingaloud.Astandardizedtestwasdevisedforthispurpose.
10H.Pułaczewska measureswillbetakensothatthechildacquiresPolish,e.g.,attendingalanguage course.
Protectionist :Guidedbyconcernforthechild,theparentactsprotectively,eliminatingpotentialrisksandcomplicationsfromthechild’slifeandmaximisingits usefulresourcesandskills.
ThefactorsthatdeterminetheactualstrategyofdealingwithPolishinfamilies withprotectiveparentsaretheperceptionoftheattitudestowardsbilingualchildren, thePolishlanguageandPolishsocialidentityinthewidersocialenvironment,and theviewsabouttheimpactofexposuretoL1uponschoolandlifeachievement.A protectiveparentabstainsfrompassingonPolishandthesenseofPolishidentityif shedecidesthattheircultivationisnotinthebestinterestofthechild,andperceives themashazardousforitssocialintegration;Polishistransmittediftheparentsees itsacquisitionbythechildasbeneficialforitsfutureoptionsandachievementsin educationandcareer.
Relationist :Afundamentalvalueinparentingisthequalityoftherelationship betweentheparentandthechild.Theparentperceivescommunicationwiththechild inherL1asdeeper,moreamusing,moreaffectionate,morenatural,andallowingfor aneasierandmoreeffectivesharingofattitudes,interestsandintimateknowledge abouther“trueself”;thechild’ssharingtheparent’shighcompetenceinL1is prerequisiteforreachingasatisfactorydepthoftherelationship.
Collectivist :Familybondswithrelativesoutsidehomeconstituteafundamental valuefortheparent(familycollectivism);thePolishlanguageisatoolenablingthe childtoformandmaintainsuchbonds.
Patriotic:Theparent’sfundamentalvalueisidentificationwiththenationaland ethniccommunity;asaresult,theparentwishesforthechildtoparticipateinthis communitythroughthemediumofthePolishlanguage.
Religious-patriotic: Theparent’scorevalueisreligion,inthisparticularcontextChristianityintheinterpretationofthePolishCatholicChurch,thatis,tightly interwovenwithpatrioticsentiments;asaresult,theparentwishesforthechildtoparticipateinthereligiousservicesofthisparticularchurchanditsnationalcommunity throughthemediumofthePolishlanguage.4
Economistic: Theparentviewslanguageasameretoolofcommunication.The choiceoflanguageinaparticularsituation,andconsequentlytheextenttowhich thePolishlanguageisusedincommunicationingeneral,isdefinedbytheeconomy (speed,easeandprecision)ofgettingmessagesacross.
Theactualpracticeisthusdrivenbythechild’scompetenceinPolish,theparents’ andchild’sgraduallyimprovingcompetenceinGerman,andPolishlanguageattrition intheparent.
Sixattitudesidentifiedheremarkavarietyinfocusingonparticularsubjectsasthe mainbeneficiariesofparentingpractices,whichare:thechildintheautonomising andprotectivestance;childandparentintherelationalone;childandextendedfamily inthecollectivistone;childandL1nationinthepatrioticone;child,nationandthe
4 ChurchservicesinthePolishlanguagearemadeavailablebythePolishCatholicMissionin Regensburg,andelsewhereinGermany.
Church(?)inthepatriotic-religiousone.Finally,theeconomisticstancedescribes arelationbetweencommunicationandchildeducationbasedontheprimacyofthe communicativeaspectinchoosingaparticularlanguageonaparticularoccasion overany future-orientededucationalobjectives.
3.4ConativeParentalAttitudes—CultivationofthePolish Language
Thedatacollectedprojectaclearimageofdifferencesintheparents’patternsof behaviourinrelationtotheintergenerationaltransmissionofPolishaswellastheir ownchoicesoflanguageintheprivateandthepublicspheres.Thetwoaspects, i.e.,languagetransmissionandparentalchoicesoflanguage,arecloselyrelated anddifficulttocircumscribe.ItissignificanttonotethattheacquisitionofPolish asL1inGermanyistakingplaceunderconditionsofthehegemonyofGerman andasocietaldiscourseonimmigrants’heritagelanguages,withimmigrantparents occasionallyreceivingadvicetospeakGermanathomefromeducatorsandbeing bulliedforspeakinglanguagesotherthanGermaninthepublic(asreportedbyour respondents).Heritagelanguageshavesometimesbeenregardedasthemainobstacle toeducationalachievementofsecond-generationmigrants(e.g.,Esser, 2006,cf.also Pułaczewska, 2008, 2014, 2017),whilesignsofamorepositiveattitudeshowupinthe recentyearsasaresultofgradualdisseminationoftheresultsofscholarlyresearch onbilinguallanguageacquisitioninthemediaandtheeducationalsystem.Apart fromoccasionalharassmentdirectedagainstthePolishlanguage,manymothers alsoreportedcasesofexperienceddiscriminationandmicro-aggressionthatthey attributedtotheirethnicity,whichexplainswhythetopicoflinguisticassimilation asafacetofsocietalsubordinationfiguresimportantlyinthefollowingaccount.
Wehaveidentifiedfourdifferentpolicytypes,subjecttocontinuousmodificationsatdifferentstagesoftheparent’sandthechild’slives:activism,affirmation, submissiveandpragmaticmarginalising(distinguishedbythetypeofmotivation) and,finely,submissiveandpragmaticsuppressionofPolish.Thequotationsbelow showhowtheseattitudesmaterialisedininterviews.
Activism
TheparentopenlyassertshisorherpositiveattitudetowardspassingPolishonto thechild,centralisestheroleofPolishinfamilycommunication,takesotherstepsto supporttheacquisitionofPolishbythechildandattemptstoactivelyinfluenceother people’sattitudes(e.g.,attitudesofotherimmigrantparents,teachers,membersof thehostsocietyingeneral,bymeansofdiscussing,criticising,lecturing,blogging etc.).
[1]R:whenevershevisitedmeshewould/ speak Polish to the children/asIwouldalways squeezeinsomethinginGermanandforthatshewould/Icouldsay/ugh.what.what’s theword../punishme/no
F:scold
R:scolded/exactly/tospeakPolish
[2]R:thenitturnedoutthatoneofthekindergartennurses/Ala’snursewasalsobilingual /Croatianshewas/fromamonolingualCroatianfamily/soshelikeacceptedthatand alwayshadapositiveattitude/andlaterughIstartedtellingthemthatIwaswritingabook /IstartedinterviewingafewpeopleandlaterIprobablywenttotheheadmasterandasked herwhetherIcouldcomewith.withalecture/andsheorganisedsuchalecture/thatis sheallowedmeugh.todeliversuchatalkinthegymhall
Affirmation
TheparentaudaciouslyusesthePolishlanguageincommunicationwiththechild andothers,includinginpublicplaces,andtakesotherstepstosupporttheacquisition ofPolishbythechild.
[3]R:IwaswonderingwhyIshouldlowermyvoiceastheRussiansdid/whenIamina busandIamspeakingPolishIdonotdonotdothat/Ispeakinmyregularvoice/andI thinkthatifsomebodydoesn’tlikeitsowhat/letthemgetout/letthemcharteracar
Marginalising
• Submissive:Theparentperceivessocialpressurefromtheenvironmentwhere thereisapreferencefortheuseoftheGermanlanguage,yieldstoitandstarts usingthePolishlanguageasafamilylanguageonlyinthepresenceoffamily membersandotherspeakersofPolish.TheparentconsidersPolishinappropriate foruseinpublicplacesorinthepresenceofpeoplewhodonotspeakit,and recognisestheprimacyofrightsofpersonsrequiringsubmissiontothelinguistic practicesofthehostsociety.Consequently,theparentsubordinatesPolishtothe GermanlanguageandtransmitsPolishinalimitedway,acceptingtheincomplete competenceofhisorherchildreninPolishasa necessarycostofemigration.
[4]R:Imustsay/thatI.speakPolishalot/behindthecloseddoor/quitealot/butifI knowforexample/thatmyneighboursaresittinghereandhavevisitors.fromtheirfamily/ andIforexamplewouldbesittinghere..withthechildrenandhavingdinnerontheterrace /thenIwouldalsoratherspeakGerman/outofrespectforthatfamily/Ireckonthatthey feelbetter/simplyugh.ifGermanisspokenhere/soitseemstome[..]
R:Ibelieve/thatthis.thisPolishlanguage/thatitisjustahomelanguageforus/which howeverdoesnotmean/thatIshouldbeflauntingitaroundtown/walkandshoutinPolish to.to.to.tothechildren/Idonotneedtodothat/becauseIdoitathome
• Pragmatic:TheparentusesGermanlanguagefrequentlywhentalkingtothechild inordertoimprovecommunicationwiththechild,orfamilycommunicationin general,inviewofthechild’shigherlinguisticcompetenceinGerman,and/or thechild’sreluctancetousethePolishlanguage,and/orthelackofsufficient knowledgeofPolishonthepartofthespouse.TheparentsubordinatesPolishto Germanonpracticalgroundsandtransmitsthelanguageinalimitedway,accepting theincompletecompetenceofhisorherchildreninPolishasan adequatecostof efficientcommunication.
[5]F:nowyouandZosia/youandTom/inpercentage
R:so/youmustputugh.eightypercentGerman/TomtwentypercentPolish/andwith Zosiathereiseven.more/ninetypercentuh.German/tenforPolish[..]
F:ifugh.TomanswersinGermantoyourutteranceinthePolishlanguage/sowhatis yourreactiontothat/.forinstanceIswitchintoGerman/IcontinueinPolishwithoutany comment/ItellmychildtospeakPolish/itdoesnothappen
R:Ileaveitwithnocomment/(Ineverreacttothat/becauseIdonotevenrealisethatany more)
F:(uhm/okay/butdoyouswitchintoGerman)orcontinueinPolishwithoutcomments
R:ifIswitchintoGerman/itisnotaconsequenceofthefact/thatsomeoneelsespeaks German/onlysometimesitisforme.outof/outoflikesomeeconomyoflanguage/itis simplymoreconvenient
Suppression
• Submissive:TheparentperceivesthepreferenceforGermanandthepressure touseitfromthesocialenvironment(whichmayalsoberepresentedbythe spouse),abstainsfromusingPolishincommunicationwiththechildandperceives disadvantagesofthechildnotknowingPolishasanadequatecostofincreased socialacceptanceforthechildand/ortheparent,oranadequatecostofunanimity inthehome.
[6]R:mysister-in-lawforexample/theyalsohavebeenlivinghereforaverylongtime/ aboutthirtyyearstoo/sowiththemitwasdefinitively.sotospeak/moreorlessforbidden tospeakPolish/right
Q:mhm
R:er.eronlyforthechildren’ssake/sothatthechildrenhavethisstartats-inthe kindergarden/atschool/inthegymnasium5 /inthebestschooler.ersimplythebeststart /sotheGermanlanguage/thePolishlanguagewascrossedout
[7]P:diditoccurtoyouthatyoucouldtalktoLisainPolishtoo/sothatshelearnsitina way
R:mmm
P:hasthereeverbeensuchanideaornotatall
R:yesright/therehasbeensuchanidea/butunfortunatelyIcouldnotpushitthroughmy husband/hahahaha
• Pragmatic:TheparentusesmostlyGermanwhentalkingtothechildinorder toimprovecommunicationwiththechildorfamilycommunicationingeneral, inviewofthechild’shigherlinguisticcompetenceinGerman,and/orthechild showingreluctancetousethePolishlanguage,and/orthelackofsufficientknowledgeofPolishonthepartofthespouse.Theparentacceptsthechild’slackof competenceinPolish,perceivingitasanadequatecostofefficientcommunicationinviewofhisorherownlackofdeeperemotionalattachmenttothePolish language,lowassessmentofthepotentialbenefitsforthechildfromacquiring Polish,orestimationofthecostofpassingonPolishastoohigh.
[8]R:itishardtounderstandforpeopleinPolandwhy/(thechildisnottaught)
Q:(andyou/howdid/how)didyoujustifyorhow(.well.didyouexplainthesituation)
R:(thesameasItold you)thatsimplyyouknow/thatIworkforlivingandyouknow/I cannotmanagetorepeateverythingtwice/becauseIwouldreallyhavetoyouknoweither consistentlyonlyusePolish/uhmandwithMartinGerman/whichwouldrequirerepeating things
5 Aschoolincludinggrades5through12/13andleadingtoqualificationforuniversitystudies.
PragmaticMarginalisingandPragmaticSuppression
Thespeedofcommunication,itssimplicityinthesenseofunity(refrainingfrom switchingbetweentwocodes),anditscomprehensibilityforthechildarefactorsthat workinfavourofthelanguagethatthechildknowsbetter,i.e.,German.Inparticular,linguisticactionssuchasdiscussinghomework(tobepreparedinGermanasthe languageofinstructionatschool)ortellingstoriesrelatedtoeventsthatoccurredin aGerman-speakingenvironmentpushthescalestowardsGerman.Otheraspectsof communicativeeconomyaretheeaseofproductionandprocessingofanutterance forbothinterlocutors,andfrequentco-presenceofaspousewhodoesnotspeakPolish.AnadditionalintroductionofthePolishlanguagewouldbeanimpediment,and future-orientededucationalintentionsdonotplayaroleinchoosingthelanguage; economyofcommunicationprevails.TheprobabilitythatthemostefficientcommunicationcanbesecuredbytheuseofGermanratherthanPolishincreaseswithtime asaconsequenceofthePolish-speakingparents’growingcompetenceinGerman andweakeningcompetenceinPolish.
SubmissiveMarginalising
ThemarginalisationoftheroleofthePolishlanguageinachild’slifestemmedfrom thebeliefthatareductionofinputinPolishwillcontributetoabettermasteryofthe Germanlanguage,stabilisetheGermanidentityofthechild,andallowforthechild’s betterintegrationinthesociety.Linguisticadaptationtothesurroundingmajority wasviewedasawaytosafeguardschoolachievementandsocialacceptanceforboth theparentsandthechild.
SubmissiveSuppression
Thisapproach,eventhoughitwasoftenreferredtobytherespondentscommenting ontheirspouses,extendedfamilyandfriends,onlyoccurredinonerespondent(and theinterviewwasexceptionalinthatitrequiredmonetaryremuneration).Itmustbe assumedthattheattitudetowardsPolishresultinginsuchapracticeisalsolinkedto theirlackofinterestinthePolishlanguageitselfandinthepeople,institutionsand researchprojectsassociatedwithit—possiblybecausetheirparticipationinsucha surveywouldbesymptomaticoftheirpartiallyrejectedethnicity,andbecausethey donotwanttosubmitthemselvestoanticipatedcriticalevaluationbytheresearcher (i.e.,duetoawarenessofconflictinvalues).Wedrawsuchaconclusionindirectly fromnumerousrejections(31)wereceivedwhenaskingforinterviewsaboutthe (non)transmissionofPolish,andnumerousrefusalstogivepermissiontochildren whodidnotspeakPolishtoparticipateinaparallelstudybasedoninterviewswith teenagers.
Table 1 showsallrelationshipsbetweenaxiologicalandconativeattitudes observedinthesample.Thisincludesvariousoutcomesoftheautonomisingattitude ineffectofchildagency,aswellasvariousoutcomesoftheprotectionistattitude whichresultfromvariedparentalperceptionsoftheGermanmajority’sattitudes towardsthemaintenanceofPolish.
Table1 Relationsbetweenaxiologicalandconativeattitudesobservedinthesample
Axiological attitude
Autonomising
Patriotic
Intervening perception
Perception of child preferences
Resultant conative attitude
Marginalising/suppression
Activism/affirmation
Religiouspatriotic Affirmation
Collectivist Protectionist
Perception of social attitudes
Marginalising
Suppression/marginalising Or Affirmation
RelativistAffirmation
Economistic
Marginalising/suppression
Wealsotookaprobativelookattherelationbetweenthechildren’slanguage competenceandmarginalisingversusaffirmationandactivismin18motherswho passedPolishon.FromthesevenchildrenwhoknewPolishwellorverywell,five hadmotherswhoshowedtheaffirmativeattitudeandthemotheroftheremaining twoshowedtheactivistattitude.Thislevelofcompetencewasnotreachedbyany ofthechildrenwhosemothersmarginalisedPolish.Theresultsuggeststhatthe marginalisingattitudeimposesalimituponateenager’slanguagecompetenceinL1, whilethesmallsamplesizelimitsgeneralisability.
4TheValueofAssimilation
Theabove-mentioneddifferencesinthehierarchiesofvaluesnaturallysparkmoral evaluations.SimilarlyastheinterviewsconductedintheUSAbyKingandFogle (2006)withparentsofSpanish-Englishbilinguals,ourinterviewsrevealedthatparentswhopassedonPolishandperceiveditasanimportantvalueenrichingthechild, therelationshipbetweentheparentandthechild,therelationshipbetweenthechild andotherrelatives,ortherelationbetweenthechildandthePolishnation,were criticalofimmigrantparentswhodidnotpassonPolishorotherheritagelanguages. Whilewerefrainfromanyevaluationofoneortheothersetofpractices,itneedstobe pointedoutthatsuchdecisions,unfavourableforthePolishlanguage,arelegitimised bytheparents’atleastpartiallycorrectdiagnosisofattitudestowardslinguisticand ethnicdifferencepresentinthesociety,andpotentialconsequencesofthecultivationofsuchdifference.Parentalactionsanddecisionsorientedtowardsthechild’s de-ethnicisation(here:de-polonisation)arebasedonrationalassumptionsandare takeninthebestinterestofthechildasitisperceivedbytheparents.Itisforthe samereasonthatMexicanparentsdiscussedbyPease-Alvarez(2003)donotpass onSpanishtotheirchildreninCalifornia,inanefforttoimprovetheirsocialstatus andletthemenjoythebenefitsassociatedwithbecomingAmericans.Thegoalis
toprotectthechildfromnegativeinfluencethatthechild’sidentificationwiththe minorityethnicgroupmayhaveonhisorherschoolachievement,psychological developmentandlifesatisfaction.Parentsmayhavelegitimatedoubtswhetherthey haveadequateeducationalmeansattheirdisposaltocounteractrisksthatanethnic difference—inthecaseofthePolesandtheGermansmadevisiblealmostexclusivelythroughlanguage,forthelackofracialandlifestyledifference—bringswith itself.If,atthesametime,theyshowaprevailingprotectiveattitudeandpositively assessthechild’schancestoacquireacoherentsenseofGermanidentitybecause theyarethemselvesreadytogiveupcherishingtheirethnicorigin,suppressionof Polishemergesasalogicalconsequence.
Inordertoindicatethepotentialscaleofsuppressionitshouldbenotedthatmore than50%ofthechildrenwithaPolishparentinRegensburgagedbetween13and 15whotookpartinasurveythatweconductedintheyears2015–2016wereraised withoutthePolishlanguage.6 AsimilarfigurewascitedbyBartol-Jarosi´nska(1994) afterGruszczy´nski(1981)forPolishimmigrantsinFranceinthe1970s.7
Whilecontemporarywritersonbilingualismgenerallysupportmaintenance,the viewthatcultivationoflinguisticandethnicdifferencecouldbedetrimentaltoa childfindssomeempiricalsupportinearlierliterature.Forexample,Smoliczand Secombe(1981)citeareportbyKringasandLewins(1979),whoclaimthatsocioeconomicadvancementisincompatiblewiththepreservationofethnicbackground inthesecondgenerationofimmigrantsinAustralia(whiletheycriticisethis,and blamesocialrelations).TurningbacktoGermany,itmustbeassertedthatwedonot knowhowcultivatingone’sminorityheritagelanguageinGermanycorrelateswith educationalprofilesandcareerprospectsofchildrenfrommigrantfamiliesbecause suchquantitativestudieshavehardlybeenconducted.Thevalidityoftheresultsfrom asinglequantitativesurveydiscussedbyEsser(2006)hasbeenlegitimatelyputto doubt,e.g.,byBrizi´c(2009).8
5ConcludingRemarks
ThetypologiesweproposeddonotonlyservetodescribethesituationofPolishasa heritagelanguageinRegensburgfromtheparentalperspectivebutalsoaremeantas apossiblesteptowardscreatinganextendablemodelofbilingualparentingbasedon empiricalinput.Parentalpracticesandattitudestopassingonaheritagelanguagein
6 Thesurveywasconductedonasampleof625studentsaged13through15insixschoolsofthree differentprofiles,44ofwhichdeclaredhavingaPolishspeakingparent;ofthese,only17declared thattheyhadbeengrowingupwithPolish.
7 Outof36Polish-GermanfamilieslivinginGermanysurveyedbyJa´nczak(2013),only9didnot raisetheirchildrenbilingually,butshewasusingaconveniencesample.
8 Brizi´c(2009)arguedthatthesurveywasflawedbecauseitdidnottakeintoaccountalanguage shiftfromaparentalmothertonguetoanother(majority)languagethathadfrequentlytakenplace beforethefamiliesunderstudymovedtoGermany,andgravelyaffectedthequalityofthelanguage spokeninthehome.Cf.alsoRoche(2013)whocriticisesEsser’s(2006)choiceofsurveyscovered ingeneral,includingthoseconductedinothercountries.
thecontextofdispersedmigrationprovetobeinfluencedbyparent’saxiologicalattitudestoparenting,thatis,theirideasaboutparentingtasksandhierarchiesofvalues tobecherished,acteduponandpassedontochildren.However,wealsoobservedthat thereisnostraightforwardone-to-onelinkbetweenfocusingonaparticularvaluein parentingontheonehand,andtheamountofparentalsupportfortheheritagelanguageontheother.Socialperceptionsandbeliefsaboutlanguageinterpose,leading tovariousoutcomes.Thesameattitudefocusedonchildprotectionmayproducevariedconativeattitudesanddecisionsonintergenerationaltransmissionofaheritage language—itsaffirmation,marginalisationorsuppression—ifcoupledwithdifferent experience-basedbeliefsaboutthesocialattitudesoftheethnicmajoritytodifferencemanifestedthroughlanguage,aswellasdifferentbeliefsabouttheinfluence ofL1acquisitionuponschoolachievement(whilethebeliefinanadversecorrelationitselfresultedentirelyfromsocialpressures).Atthesametime,practicesof marginalisingandsuppressingtheheritagelanguagemayproceedfromdifferentaxiologicalstances—aprimacyofapragmatichere-and-nowapproachtolanguageasa toolforefficientlymanagingcurrentcommunicativeneeds,or,alternatively,beliefs indecencyofassimilationoradversesocialanddevelopmentalconsequencesof usingL1.
Itremainsanempiricalquestiontowhichextenttheresultspresentedherereflect varianceinheritagelanguagetransmissioninimmigrationcontextsingeneral.Our analysispertainstoraisingchildrenwithaparticularminoritylanguageinaparticular society;moreover,westudiedasingularmajority-minorityrelationshipinwhich racialdifferencedoesnotfeatureatall,andthedifferenceinthefieldofreligionis ofaverysubtlesort.9 Itisnotclearthatasimilarattitudinalvariancewouldemerge fromananalysisofotherimmigrantlanguagesinGermany,orthesituationofPolish andotherimmigrants’languagesinothertowns,regions,andcountries.Wehope, however,toextendourresearchinthefutureinordertotesttherobustnessofthe typologiesproposed.
Appendix
Transcriptionconventions:
Qinterviewer
Rrespondent
()overlappingspeech
.abreakofthedurationofoneortwosyllables
..abreakofthedurationofthreeormoresyllables [..]omission
/tonegroupboundary neveremphasis
//sigh//paraverbalaction
9 WhileBavariaisalsoaCatholiccountry,notonlyisthePolishCatholicChurchmorenationalist innaturebutalsoreligiousardourgreaterinthePoles.
18H.Pułaczewska
References
Bartol-Jarosi´nska,D.(1994).J˛ezykpolskiito˙zsamo´s´cpolskanaemigracji.InS.Dubisz(Ed.), Graniceipogranicza (pp.145–156).Warszawa:PWN.
Berry,J.W.(1980).Acculturationasvarietiesofadaptation.InA.Padilla(Ed.), Acculturation: Theory,modelsandfindings (pp.9–25).Boulder:Westview.
Berry,J.W.(2001).Apsychologyofimmigration. JournalofSocialIssues,57, 615–631.
Brizi´c,K.(2009).BildungsgewinnbeiSprachverlust?EinsoziolinguistischerVersuch,Gegensätze zuüberwinden.InI.Gogolin&U.Neumann(Eds.), StreitfallZweisprachigkeit—Thebilingualism controversy (pp.133–143).Wiesbaden:VSVerlagfürSozialwissenschaften.
Caldas,S.J.,&Caron-Caldas,S.(2002).Asociolinguisticanalysisofpreferencesofthelanguage preferencesofbilingualadolescents:Shiftingallegiancesanddevelopingidentities. AppliedLinguistics,23(4),490–516.
Chik,C.A.(2010). Lookingbothways:Structure,agency,andlanguageideologyataChinese Saturdayschool .LosAngeles:UniversityofCalifornia.
Chiro,G.(n.d.). FlorianZnaniecki’shumanisticsociologyrevisited. Retrievedfrom https://tasa. org.au/wpcontent/uploads/2008/12/312.pdf
Esser,H.(2006). SpracheundIntegration.DiesozialenBedingungenundFolgendesSpracherwerbs vonMigranten.FrankfurtamMain:CampusVerlag.
Gruszczy´nski,J.(1981).Społeczno´s´cpolskaweFrancji1918-1978.Problemyintegracyjnetrzech pokole´n.Warszawa:PWN.
Guardado,J.M.(2008). LanguagesocializationinCanadianHispaniccommunities:Ideologies andpractices.Doctoraldissertation,UniversityofBritishColumbia(Canada). Hitlin,S.(2003).Valuesasthecoreofpersonalidentity:Drawinglinksbetweentwotheoriesof self. SocialPsychologyQuarterly,66 (2),118–137.
Ja´nczak,B.A.(2013). Deutsch-polnischeFamilien:IhreSprachenundFamilienkultureninDeutschlandundinPolen.Frankfurt:PeterLang.
Kasatkina,N.(2010). AnalyzinglanguagechoiceamongRussian-speakingimmigrantstotheUnited States.Doctoraldissertation.TheUniversityofArizona.
Katz,D.(1937).Attitudemeasurementasamethodinsocialpsychology.[Electronicversion]. SocialForces,15 (4),479–482.Retrievedfrom http://psych.colorado.edu/~chlo0473/teaching/ 2015_F/articles/Katz_1960.pdf
King,K.,Fogle,L.(2006).Bilingualparentingasgoodparenting:Parents’perspectivesonfamily languagepolicyforadditivebilingualism. InternationalJournalofBilingualEducationand Bilingualism, 9.6 ,695–712.
King,K.A.,&Fogle,L.W.(2013).Researchtimeline.Familylanguagepolicyandbilingual parenting. LanguageTeaching,46.2, 172–194.
Krashen,S.(1992). Fundamentalsoflanguageeducation.Torrance,CA:Laredo. Kringas,P.,Lewins,F.(1979). Migrantdefinitionsofethnicschools:Selectedcasestudies:PreliminaryreporttotheEducationResearchandDevelopmentCommittee.Canberra:Education ResearchandDevelopmentCommitte.
Lao,C.(2004).Parents’attitudestowardChinese-EnglishbilingualeducationandChinese-language use. BilingualResearchJournal,28 (1),99–121. Lei,J.(2007). Alanguagesocializationapproachtotheinterplayofethnicrevitalizationandheritagelanguagelearning—CasestudiesofChineseAmericanadolescents.Diss.:StateUniversity ofNewYorkatAlbany.
Okita,T.(2002). Invisiblework.Bilingualism,languagechoiceandchildrearinginintermarried families.TheNetherlands:JohnBenjamins. Park,H.,Tsai,K.M.,Liu,L.L.,&Lau,A.S.(2012).Transactionalassociationsbetweensupportivefamilyclimateandyoungchildren’sheritagelanguageproficiencyinimmigrantfamilies. InternationalJournalofBehavioralDevelopment,36 (3),226–236. Plopa,J.(2005). Psychologiarodziny.Teoriaibadania.Kraków:Impuls.
Pułaczewska,H.(2008).Społeczneiorganizacyjneaspektyrozwojuipodtrzymywania dwuj˛ezyczno´sciudziecidwukulturowych.InA.Głowala&I.Witczak-Plisiecka(Eds.), J˛ezyki obcewprzedszkoluiwszkolepodstawowejwperspektywieinterdyscyplinarnej/Interdisciplinary perspectivesonforeignlanguagepedagogyattheprimarylevel (Vol.7,pp.39–52).Zeszyty NaukowePWSZwPłocku,Pedagogika.
Pułaczewska,H.(2014).Polish-Germanbilingualismatschool:aPolishperspective. Linguistik Online,64.Specialissue:LanguageConvergenceinBi-andMultilinguals,69–81. Pułaczewska,H.(2017). Wychowaniedoj˛ezykapolskiegowNiemczechnaprzykładzieRatyzbony. Dwuj˛ezyczno´s´cdziecizperspektywyrodziców. PrimumVerbum:Łód´z. Roche,J.(2013). Mehrsprachigkeitstheorie.Tübingen:Narr. Rosenberg,M.J.,&Hovland,C.I.(1960).Cognitive,affectiveandbehavioralcomponentsof attitudes.InM.J.Rosenberg&C.I.Hovland(Eds.), Attitudeorganizationandchange:An analysisofconsistencyamongattitudecomponents (pp.112–163).NewHaven:YaleUniversity Press.
Schwartz,S.(1994).Arethereuniversalaspectsinthestructureandcontentofhumanvalues? JournalofSocialIssues,50, 19–45.
Schwartz,S.(1996).Valueprioritiesandbehavior:Applyingatheoryofintegratedvaluesystems.In C.Seligman,J.M.Olson,&M.P.Zanna(Eds.), TheOntariosymposium:Vol.8.Thepsychology ofvalues (pp.1–24).Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.Retrievedfrom http://www.palermo.edu/ scienciassociales/psicologia/publicaciones/pdf/Psico2/2Psico%2007.pdf.
Schwartz,M.(2010).Familylanguagepolicy:Coreissuesofanemergingfield. AppliedLinguistics Review,1(1),171–192.
Shepherd,S.(2006). MaintaininganimmigrantheritagelanguageotherthanSpanishorEnglishin thebilingualcultureoftheRioGrandeValleyofSouthTexas.Diss.:TheUniversityofTexas-Pan American.
Smolicz,J.J.(1974).Theconceptoftradition:Ahumanisticsociologicalinterpretation. Australian andNewZealandJournalofSociology,10 (2),75–83.
Smolicz,J.J.(1992).Minoritylanguagesascorevaluesofethniccultures.InW.Hase,S.Kroon, &K.Jaspaert(Eds.), Maintenanceandlossofminoritylanguages (pp.277–305).Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Smolicz,J.J.,&Secombe,M.J.(1981). TheAustralianschoolthroughchildren’seyes.Melbourne: MelbourneUniversityPress.
Spolsky,B.(2004). Languagepolicy.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Spolsky,B.(2009). Languagemanagement .Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Tannenbaum,M.(2005).Viewingfamilyrelationsthroughalinguisticlens:Symbolicaspectsof languagemaintenanceinimmigrantfamilies. JournalofFamilyCommunication,5 (3),229–252. Tannenbaum,M.,&Howie,P.(2002).Theassociationbetweenlanguagemaintenanceandfamily relations:ChineseimmigrantchildreninAustralia. JournalofMultilingualandMulticultural Development,23(5),408–424.
WongFillmore,L.(2000).Lossoffamilylanguages:Shouldeducatorsbeconcerned? TheoryInto Practice,39 (4),203–210.
Yang,T.(2008).Hmongparents’criticalreflectionsontheirchildren’sheritagelanguagemaintenance. JournalofSoutheastAsianAmericanEducationandAdvancement,3.Retrievedfrom http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jsaaea/vol3/iss1/17.
Znaniecki,F.(1963). Culturalsciences.Urbana:UniversityofIllinois.
HannaPułaczewska studiedEnglishPhilologyinŁód´z(Poland)andGeneralandComparative LinguisticsinRegensburg(Germany)whereshereceivedheracademicdegrees.Hermainfields ofstudyarecognitivesemantics,comparativepragmaticsand,mostrecently,languagepolicyand planning.CurrentlysheisProfessorofEnglishLinguisticsandDirectoroftheInstituteofEnglish StudiesattheUniversityofSzczecin,Poland.
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
dormir en buen lecho, leer algun libro, hacer resonar bajo sus dedos la lira de Thracia.
Pero si el viento de las tempestades se lleva mis vanas palabras, ¡que al menos favorezca Galatea á la nave que te conduce! Si llega á perecer tal belleza, vuestro seria el crímen y de vuestro padre, Diosas y Nereidas. Parte pensando en mí para volver al primer viento propicio, y que su soplo más fuerte hinche entonces tus velas. Que el poderoso Nereo vuelva la mar inclinada sobre esta ribera; que el viento empuje las naves hácia aquí: y por aquí el flujo precipite las aguas. Tú misma ruega á los céfiros soplen de lleno en tus velas, que tus propias manos ayudarán á hacer mover.
Yo seré el primero en descubrir desde la ribera tu nave querida; y diré: «esa nave trae otra vez mis dioses.» Te recibiré en mis brazos, tomaré rápidamente desordenados besos; la víctima ofrecida para tu regreso caerá al pié de los altares. Extenderé en forma de lecho la lijera arena de la playa, y el primer otero nos servirá de mesa. Allí con el vaso en la mano me contarás todas tus aventuras; me describirás tu navío medio engullido por las oleadas; me dirás que viniendo hácia mí no temias ni al frio ni á la noche, ni á los austros impetuosos. Todo esto, aunque fuese fingido, será verdad para mí; lo creeré todo. ¿Y por qué no he de creer yo con complacencia lo que más deseo? ¡Ojalá pudiese la estrella de la mañana, brillando en un cielo sin nubes, traerme desde luego este dichoso dia!