shankar

Language use, choice, maintenance, and ethnolinguistic* vitality** of Turkish speakers in France : intergenerational differences Kulay Yagmur and Mehemet-Ali Akinci: 

Language use, choice, maintenance, and ethnolinguistic* vitality** of Turkish speakers in France : intergenerational differences Kulay Yagmur and Mehemet-Ali Akinci * Study of the relationship between language and cultural behavior. ** The ability to stay alive. SHANKAR PRAWESH

ABSTRACT : 

ABSTRACT Language maintenance and shift of Turkish community in France. Study and survey based on different societal factors and individual’s perception of the language contact situation. Subjective ethnolinguistic vitality, a language use case-choice, and self-rating scale questionnaire were applied. Attitude of First-generation and second-generation informants towards Turkish vitality rating.

INTRODUCTION: 

INTRODUCTION No consensus over the definition and measuring concepts over observations of the terms shift and maintenance. Factors involved were divided in two categories: those affecting a speech community and those affecting individuals within a speech community. Language maintenance is based on EV of a linguistic minority group like status, demographic, institutional support etc.

Slide4: 

Demographic variable are number and distribution patterns which also includes birth rate, the rate of immigration, mixed marriages etc. Institutional support and control factors refer to the extent to which an EL group receives formal and informal support in various institution like mass media, education, govt. services, religion and politics.

Turkish immigrants in France: 

Turkish immigrants in France

Slide6: 

Massive Turkish migration started after first bilateral immigration agreement between France and Turkey was signed in 1965. Labor migration, family reunification. The younger have been through the French school system and better vocational profile than older generation. Children tend to speak Turkish with parents and French among themselves. Majority of Turkish population is blue-collar workers, 43.7% in production, 28.5% in construction and 23.5% in services.

Slide7: 

This study was conducted in Rhone-Alpes where 17% Turkish population is located. According to the study conducted by INSEE 98% of the girls and 92% percent of the boys are marrying in Turkish group, which led to renewal of migration process. Compared to other immigration in contexts (e.g. Australia or U.S.A. ),Turkish immigrants in France have more resources, domains, and facilities of 1st language use and maintenance. Tradition of sending dead body to Turkey is still very strong among Turkish immigrants.

Slide8: 

Turkish language media is readily accessible. There are weekly magazines and journals from Turkey. Turkish language play are performed by actors. Movies, concerts and exhibition of Turkish art are common all over western Europe. Major Turkish TV channels can be received by cable. Internet has added new domain of 1st language resource. On the basis of bilateral cultural agreement French and Turkish governments provide mother tongue education for Turkish students. The Turkish government sends teachers from Turkey to teach language, Turkish history, and geography in French. French policies supports for integration and linguistic assimilation of immigrants, for this a commission was also set up in 1987.

METHODOLOGY: 

METHODOLOGY On the basis of data collected following hypothesis were tested: Older immigrants have more positive attitude towards Turkish language than younger immigrants ( France born 2nd generation). Concerning Turkish vitality, older immigrants have higher subjective vitality perceptions than younger immigrants. There is relationship between 1st language use and ethnoliguistic vitality of the Turkish immigrants.

INFORMANTS: 

INFORMANTS Two groups of informants were selected so tha intergenerational differences could be accounted for. There were 175 informants 80 females and 95 males. The informants were divides into two groups on the basis of their age. Birth country criteria was also considered but some Turkey born young informants are included in the category of second generation.

DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS: 

DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS Three types of questionnaires were used as data collection instruments: Language use-choice questionnaire (LUCQ). This includes three sections on: background characteristics, language use-choice, and language altitudes. Ethnolinguistic vitality questionnaire (SEVQ). It involved rating French and Turkish immigrants to France on 22 items. Status, demography, and institutional support were also considered. Self-rating scale (SRS), informants were asked to rate their spoken language ability on 14 language tasks of varying difficulty level.

Findings on language use and choice Questionnaire (LUCQ): 

Findings on language use and choice Questionnaire (LUCQ) * The scale is 1(very little) to 5(very much).

Slide13: 

Another similar kind of survey was done to observe the intergenerational differences and following points were concluded: 1)Young informants speak mostly Turkish with their parents but with their siblings and parents they speak more French. 2)Slow and gradual shifts of language is taking place among young informants. 3)Older informants prefer Turkish under all circumstances, while younger informants prefer French.

Language preferences of informants(The scale is 1only Turkish and 5 only French): 

Language preferences of informants (The scale is 1only Turkish and 5 only French)

Slide15: 

Younger informants choose French for variety of topics ,only on religious matters younger informants are similar to older informants. Turkish importance is accepted in Turkish community for maintenance of identity, cultural survival and in family. Younger informants have higher rating than older for importance of Turkish to raise children. For finding job, receiving education, and living in France Turkish language is less functional. Language proficiency and use-choice are highly correlated.

Self-rating scales: 

Self-rating scales Data was collected in similar way as earlier. Different situations considered for attitudes towards Turkish were Trade, Job, esteem etc. For self rating questions like say the days of the week, give the current date, comprehend jokes, comedies etc. were used. Younger informants give higher rating for their French skills but lower rating for Turkish. In understanding Turkish proverbs and idiomatic expressions younger generation have lower ratings compared to the 1st generation informants. Older immigrants have much lower rating for their French skills compared to younger generation.

Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions: 

Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions Results of this questionnaire show that both G1 and G2 give French higher vitality rating. the younger informants ratings for French vitality are lower compared to older informants. Only on the variables, extent of in-group marriage, pride of cultural history, and language used in religious worship, both G1 and G2 give Turkish higher vitality ratings than French.

TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS: 

TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS In order to identify internal consistency estimation of the items, the variables were subjected to reliability analysis. In order to test the two hypotheses stated earlier, an analysis of variance between younger (G1) and older informants’ (G2) scores for language use (named USE), language preference (PREF), language attitudes (ATUDE), language choice (CHOICE), self-rating scale Turkish (SRTUR), self-rating scale French (SRFRE), Turkish vitality (VITUR), and French vitality (VITFR) was done.

Slide19: 

The first two hypothesis stated earlier are null hypothesis and ANOVA was used to test whether the group mean are equal in the population. As opposed to our expectations, France-born second generation Turkish immigrants have more positive attitudes towards Turkish than older immigrants. Concerning the vitality of Turkish in France, the differences between the two groups ratings are very large, which is contrary to the assumption postulated in the second hypothesis.

Slide20: 

In order to test the third hypothesis, language use, proficiency, attitudes, and choice scores of first and second-generation informants were correlated with subjective ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions. There is both positive and negative correlation is because of the fact that 2nd generation informants use Turkish and French with certain interlocuters. For example using Turkish with parents but French with siblings and friends. This finding is contrary to some earlier assumptions that language proficiency exerts a particularly strong influence on language choice (Klatter-Folmer and Van Avermaet 2001).

Slide21: 

The findings of this study suggest that both the speaker’s and the interlocutor’s language use exert an influence on language choice. Accordingly, there is a significant negative relationship between the Turkish vitality scale and the Turkish self-rating scale.

CONCLUSION: 

CONCLUSION On the basis of the survey results, we have a better understanding of the factors that support Turkish language maintenance. Turkish is mostly spoken in the domestic domain and in the neighborhood with other Turkish immigrants. Turkish immigrants concentrate in certain working-class suburbs, which provide them with a strong network of speakers of Turkish. Basic conditions for first language maintenance are available. e.g. mass media, in group marriages. younger informants have more positive attitudes towards Turkish than the older informants.

Slide23: 

Younger informants prefer French in most domains. The dominant language will replace mother tongues of communities with low ethnolinguistic vitality. Reconsideration of the concept of subjective ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions and its relationship to language use because of high first language proficiency among third generation Turkish primary school children. Second-generation informants have more positive attitudes towards Turkish and also higher vitality ratings. Turkish remains to be a core value for self-identification even if there is language shift among second-generation immigrants.

Slide24: 

THANK YOU