Multilingualism: a thriving or withering asset?

In public discourse we commonly hear that migration has brought great benefits to Australia. This mantra stands in alongside the mere noting of the demographic fact that Australia’s residents come from a wide range of culturally diverse backgrounds. Too often both the positivist mantra that declares ‘migration has made Australia better’, and the bland acknowledgement of the reality of the nation’s demographic diversity neglect First Nations peoples—who for over 65,000 years have continually shared and transformed their cultural diversity.

Australia’s language ecology

This cultural diversity conundrum and the multifaceted tapestry of languages that characterises Australian society have always intrigued and challenged me—especially the transmission and evolution across generations of the languages of First Nations peoples, and also of the many languages brought by the immigrant minorities, the so called Heritage Languages (HLs).[1]

Since at least the 1970s, detailed analyses of language-related questions in the Census[2] have provided precious information on Australia’s language ecology. Regarding HLs, longitudinal studies show the impact of the changing immigration flows on the numbers of home speakers of the many different languages.

For example, increased migration from India shifted Punjabi from the ninth most spoken home language in 2016 to the fifth in 2021.

Studies have also highlighted the so-called language shift, noting that migrants tend to abandon their languages relatively quickly, not only in the transition from the first generation (overseas born people) to the second (Australia born people with one or both overseas born parents), but also within the first.

Interestingly, the comparison of language shift as it occurs within immigrant groups as well as across groups and across Censuses, brings to light wide variations from group to group. As an example, from 2016 to 2021, amongst the Italy-born, the home use of Italian decreased from 79% to 71%, and from 41% to 32% amongst the second generation with both parents of Italian background (often called endogamous). Conversely, amongst the Germany-born, the home use of German shifted from 42% in 2016 to 33% in 2021, while amongst the endogamous second generation the shift was from 18% in 2016 to 15% in 2021.

On the one hand Australia’s multilingualism is fuelled, maintained, and diversified by migration flows, as evidenced by the fast growth of Punjabi. On the other, Census data give clear indications of how the migrant resident communities struggle to pass on their HLs across generations. The rapid loss of such linguistic and cultural richness has led linguist Ingrid Piller FAHA, currently the Humboldt Professor at the Universität Hamburg, to call Australia “a graveyard of languages”; a term that can be appropriately assigned to the way language eradication was used as an arm in the war of cultural genocide waged against, and resisted by First Nations peoples.

Census data good but struggles to capture nuance

Precious as they are, Census data nonetheless have a range of limitations. Self-assessed language use primarily gathers perceptions rather than actual use of languages, indexing attitudes such as sense of identity or language loyalty. Furthermore, since the question focuses on language use within the home, it does not and cannot tell the whole story of a language.

Italian is a good example of this, since the second and subsequent generations of Australian Italians are likely to use their HLs mostly outside their own nuclear family, such as in the grandparents’ home, in friendship groups or sports events amongst others. Current Census data therefore underestimate the presence of Italian speakers, and the diminishing numbers reflected across Censuses contrast with the regular use of the language that can be observed in a range of private and public spaces.

Census data also foreground the standard languages while obscuring the reality of minority languages that may be spoken in the home. This point is particularly relevant for the Italians, as the large majority of post-war Italian migrants arrived in Australia as bilinguals in Italian and a minority language (the so-called dialects such as Sicilian or Neapolitan), yet the Census only captures the former as their home language.

We can conclude that, like in many areas, also regarding languages Australian Census data provide important indications. Yet an array of other methods of research, analysis, and observations are necessary to better account for the dynamics of language shift and vitality of languages.

To address this challenge I have conducted a study on third generation Australian Italians that brings to the fore some interesting and unexpected findings. The third generation is a cohort that is still under-researched, despite their growing numbers and increased impact in shaping long-standing migrant communities.

The participants in this study are females and males aged between 18 and 30 whose grandparents migrated from Italy, and who self-identify as Italian and/or Australian Italian. They completed an online survey and in-depth interviews. At first glance the results confirm patterns of language use previously identified amongst the second generation of Australian Italians and of other migrant groups. That is, the third-generation prefer to use HLs when talking to older family members—their grandparents in this case. Moreover, within their nuclear family, they use HLs more commonly when speaking with their mothers than their fathers. Both findings confirm the impact of generation and of interlocutor on language choice.

Unexpected findings

Yet, there are also several somewhat unforeseen results. For example, a good proportion of the survey respondents report using Italian with their peers, both their friends and other young family members, contrary to the expectation that English is the normalised language with such interlocutors. These young people explain in the interviews that regardless of their proficiency levels, their HLs are useful resources and that they often employ their HLs with peers. Italian background youth, for example, use Italian for a range of different functions: as a way of building and marking in-group identity, as a mechanism for conveying specific, often playful, sentiments and meanings, and as a method for expressing content they do not wish to share more publicly (i.e. as a secret language).

Another unexpected finding is the strong emotional attachment, closely connected to their deep affection towards their families, that these young people manifest towards their HLs.

Even in cases of limited HL proficiency, they regard with great fondness Italian and even their ‘dialects’, albeit to a lesser extent; to the point of reporting slightly more positive attitudes towards Italian compared with English, their dominant language. It is clear also that the third generation often plays an agentive role in revitalising HLs within the family, particularly through engagement with education but also through renewed links with the ‘home’ country, facilitated by direct contacts and technology.

The linguistic trajectories and identities of these young people further highlight how HL development does not necessarily flourish more in endogamous families compared with families where only one parent is of Italian origin. The intersection of varying factors contributes to explaining this result. These range from a closer connection to the Italian side of the family, to the acculturation of non-Italian background partners, to support from the education sector. Conversely, within families with both Italian parents, some preexisting dynamics between Italian and regional dialects can weaken efforts towards HL development in the third generation; for example, purist attitudes about ‘correct form’ in Italian and negative representations of dialects.

In a context like Australia, where there has been limited official interest towards languages and language education, the maintenance and development of HLs becomes an arduous task even for the committed individual. Small scale in-depth studies can provide guidance to developing strategies for language revitalisation for third and fourth generation adult migrants, and more broadly for heritage communities. At a societal level, such studies can inform HL policies which move beyond mere rhetoric and assist in nurturing, growing and harvesting the social, economic and cultural assets of HLs.

[1] Over the years, different terms have been used to refer to the languages of the immigrant minorities. The term Heritage Language is currently amongst the most used in sociolinguistic research.

[2] Two Census questions refer specifically to language: the first asks about the use of languages other than English at home, the second relates to self-assessed proficiency in English.

The post Multilingualism: a thriving or withering asset? appeared first on Australian Academy of the Humanities.