Digital technologies and reported language practices in Russophone families in Estonia, Germany, and Sweden
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.24778Keywords:
digitalisation, Family Language Policy, heritage language transmission, immigrants, Russian, Estonia, Germany and SwedenAbstract
Forty-five Russophone families in Estonia, Germany and Sweden answered semi-structured questionnaires about their sociolinguistic characteristics and participated in in-depth interviews regarding language use, language transmission and maintenance, and attitudes to all these processes. This comparative analysis of the family context helps to explain the variation in the development of linguistic identities and language-use strategies. We identified clear similarities and differences between these families, especially regarding reported digital language practices among immigrant families. The data analysis showed that the use of digital technologies has an impact on the reported language practices among the families but not necessarily on the use of Russian as a heritage language. Most families highlighted the intensification of internet-based communication with extended family members and the supportive effect of digital technologies on intergenerational heritage language transmission, since younger family members gained more access to Russian via the internet. But the role of digital technologies alone is limited when it comes to intergenerational heritage language transmission and other factors, such as the efforts of parents and the agency of children, seem to be more important. Still, the joint use of digital technologies has a positive effect, especially in those families where the children are actively involved in digital communication.
References
Achterberg, J. (2005) Zur Vitalität slawischer Idiome in Deutschland. Munich: Sagner.
Brehmer, B. and Mehlhorn, G. (2018) Herkunftssprachen. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.
Curdt-Christiansen, X.L. and Huang, J. (2020) Factors influencing family language policy. In A.C. Schalley and S.A. Eisenchlas (eds) Handbook of home language maintenance and development: Social and affective factors 174–193. Berlin and Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501510175-009.
Daniel, S.J. (2020) Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects 49: 91–96. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3.
Dietz, B. and Roll, H. (2019) Die Einwanderung aus der Sowjetunion und ihren Nachfolgestaaten. In K. Witzlack-Makarevich and N. Wulff (eds) Handbuch des Russischen in Deutschland. Migration – Mehrsprachigkeit – Spracherwerb 101–114. Berlin: Frank and Timme.
Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI 2021) European Commission. Retrieved from: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/desi
Digitalisation of Europe (2020–2021) Evidence from the EIB Investment Survey. European Investment Bank. Retrieved from: https://www.eib.org/en/publications/digitalisation-in-europe-2020-2021
Ehala, M. and Zabrodskaja, A. (2014) Ethnolinguistic vitality and acculturation orientations of Russian speakers in Estonia. In L. Ryazanova-Clarke (ed.) The Russian language outside the nation 166–188. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748668458.003.0007.
Franklin, G. (2001) Special educational needs issues and ICT. In M. Leask (ed.) Issues in teaching using ICT 105–116. London: Routledge.
Gagarina, N., Fichman, S., Galkina, E., Protassova, E.; Ringblom, N., and Rodina, Y. (2021) How oral texts are organised in monolingual and heritage Russian: Evidence from six countries. In S. Armon-Lotem and K.K. Grohmann (eds) Language impairment in multilingual settings: LITMUS in action across Europe 47–76. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.29.02gag.
Hatoss, A. (2020) Transnational grassroots language planning in the era of mobility and the Internet. In A.C. Schalley and S.A. Eisenchlas (eds) Handbook of home language maintenance and development: Social and affective factors 274–292. Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501510175-014.
Holmes, A.G.D. (2020) Researcher positionality – A consideration of its influence and place in qualitative research – A new researcher guide. Shanlax International Journal of Education 8(4): 1–10. Doi: https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v8i4.3232.
Karpava, S., Ringblom, N., and Zabrodskaja, A. (2019) Translanguaging in the family context: Evidence from Cyprus, Sweden and Estonia. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23(3): 619–641. Doi: https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-3-619-641.
Karpava, S., Ringblom, N., and Zabrodskaja, A. (2020a) Family language policy leading to multilingual home literacy environment: Evidence from interviews with Russian-speaking mothers in Cyprus, Estonia and Sweden. HumaNetten 45: 11–39. Doi: https://doi.org/10.15626/hn.20204502.
Karpava, S., Ringblom, N., and Zabrodskaja, A. (2020b) A look at the translanguaging space of Russian-speaking families in Cyprus, Estonia and Sweden: On the possible interrelationship between family language policy and linguistic landscape. In L. Sciriha (ed.) Comparative studies in bilingualism and bilingual education 75–96. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Karpava, S., Ringblom, N., and Zabrodskaja, A. (2022) Comparing family language policy in Cyprus, Estonia and Sweden: Efforts and choices among Russian-speaking families. In M. Hornsby and W. McLeod (eds) Transmitting minority languages: Complementary reversing language shift strategies 279–304. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87910-5_11.
King, K.A., Fogle, L. and Logan-Terry, A. (2008) Family language policy. Language and Linguistics Compass 2(5): 907–922. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00076.x.
King, K.A. and Fogle, L.W. (2013) Family language policy and bilingual parenting. Language Teaching 46(2): 172–194. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000493.
Lanza, E. and Lomeu Gomes, R. (2020) Family language policy: Foundations, theoretical perspectives and critical approaches. In A.C. Schalley and S.A. Eisenchlas (eds) Handbook of home language maintenance and development: Social and affective factors 153–173. Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501510175-008.
Little, S. (2020) Social media and the use of technology in home language maintenance. In A.C. Schalley and S.A. Eisenchlas (eds) Handbook of home language maintenance and development: Social and affective factors 257–273. Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501510175-013.
Marsh, J., Hannon, P., Lewis M., and Ritchie, L. (2017) Young children’s initiation into family literacy practices in the digital age. Journal of Early Childhood Research 15(1): 47–60. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X15582095.
Maximova, S., Noyanzina, O., Omelchenko, D., and Maximova, M. (2018) The Russian-speakers in the CIS countries: Migration activity and preservation of the Russian language. MATEC Web of Conferences 212: 1–11. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201821210005.
McCarty, T.L. (ed.) (2011) Ethnography and language policy. London: Routledge.
McCarty, T.L. (2015) Ethnography in language planning and policy research. In F.M. Hult and D.C. Johnson (eds) Research methods in language policy and planning. A practical guide 81–93. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Melo-Pfeifer, S. (2015) The role of the family in heritage language use and learning: Impact on heritage language policies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 18(1): 26–44. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.868400.
Moustakas, C. (1994) Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Obojska, M.A. and Purkarthofer, J. (2018) ‘And all of a sudden, it became my rescue’: Language and agency in transnational families in Norway. International Journal of Multilingualism 15(3): 249–261. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1477103.
Parkvall, M. (2015) Sveriges språk i siffror [Swedish in numbers].Stockholm: Språkrådet, Morfem and Parkvall.
Said, F. and Zhu, H. (2019) ‘No, no Maama! Say “Shaatir ya Ouledee Shaatir”!’ Children’s agency in language use and socialisation. International Journal of Bilingualism 23(3): 771–785. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006916684919.
Schwartz, M. (2008) Exploring the relationship between family language policy and heritage language knowledge among second generation Russian-Jewish immigrants in Israel. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 29(5): 400–418. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630802147916.
Schwartz, M. (2010) Family language policy: Core issues of an emerging field. Applied Linguistics Review 1: 171–192. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110222654.171.
Smith-Christmas, C. (2021) Using a ‘family language policy’ lens to explore the dynamics and relational nature of child agency. Children and Society 36(3): 354–368. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12461.
Spolsky, B. (2012) Family language policy: The critical domain. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 33(1): 3–11. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2011.638072.
Statistisches Bundesamt (2019) Bevölkerung in Privathaushalten nach Migrationshintergrund im weiteren Sinn nach Geburtsstaat in Staatengruppen. Retrieved from: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bevoelkerung/Migration-Integration/Tabellen/migrationshintergrund-staatsangehoerigkeit-staatengruppen.html
