![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper considers the role of language ideologies in the linguistic integration of forced migrants. It discusses the findings of an ethnographic exploration that was conducted in Luxembourg with five individuals who sought refuge there. A network of teachers and institutional representatives constituted the secondary pool of research participants. Through analysis of metalinguistic discourse and narrative episodes, the paper scrutinises the instrumental and integrative dimensions of language. In particular, it draws attention to and problematises the hegemonic ideologies that inform linguistic integration. By bringing into focus multilingual realities and mobile aspirations, this research seeks to provide a new impetus to the reconceptualisation of integration.
Acknowledgements
I am indebted to all teachers, learners and institutional representatives whose participation made this study possible. I thank Sabine Ehrhart, Julia de Bres and Rosemarie Tracy for providing constructive comments on a draft version of this text. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Malika Shatnawi, Yacine Chemssi and Natalia Bîlici.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 Following DeWind’s (Citation2007) reasoning, I adopt the concept of ‘forced migration’, which encompasses refugees as well as others displaced people – internally or across recognised borders – as a result of conflicts, natural or environmental disasters, famine, broader human rights violations and/or development projects.
2 Gardner and Lambert (Citation1972) discussed two main kinds of motivation involved in language acquisition: instrumental and integrative. This distinction provides a useful framework for the examination of language ideologies. For Ager (Citation2001), the first assumes that individuals are interested in accumulating new language resources to satisfy specific goals, usually economic targets, while the second is based on the desire of individuals to associate themselves with [imagined] target communities. From my standpoint, most learning experiences discussed in this paper showed overlaps and fell somewhere in the blurry middle of this instrumental–integrative range.
3 See Radu (Citation2010).
4 Asylum seekers cannot choose the relocation country.
5 For example, Lusophones are expected to speak French (rather than German or Luxembourgish) to people from outside their community.
6 In state schools, basic literacy skills are taught in standard German. In secondary education, French gradually replaces German as the main medium of instructions.
7 See ‘Strategie fir d’Promotioun vun der Lëtzebuerger Sprooch’ (Strategy for the promotion of the Luxembourgish language) (Citation2017).
8 All research activities were approved by the Ethics Review Panel of the University of Luxembourg, the National Commission for Data Protection of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the research sites. Informed consent was obtained from each research participant.
9 Participants were approached in a French language classroom where I was conducting ethnographic observations in 2016. Two of them were suggested on referral through other participants.
10 Including possible renewal, but excluding permanent residence permits and permits granted after application for citizenship (administrative practice).
11 Having shared some of the participants’ experiences (e.g. the hardship of adjusting to a new and complex sociolinguistic environment) positioned me at times as an insider; however, I was still studying the unfamiliar in many respects. I migrated to Luxembourg from another EU member state shortly before the project’s start, therefore I had no immediate points of identification/direct experience with the researched areas. This led me to adopt a stance of not-knowing, which in turn allowed the participants to take on expert positions and author with more ease their own versions of their experiences.
12 Interviews and informal discussions took place principally in English, with French and Arabic being used as auxiliary language resources. For the data collection, transcription and analysis process, I collaborated with two native speakers of Arabic with experience in qualitative research. During the fieldwork, I also relied on approximate translations offered by the participants. The excerpts included in this paper are the research participants’ wordings and/or formulations of the person interpreting. Upon the participants’ request, filler words, false starts and irregular grammatical features have been removed.
13 By way of illustration, the initiative foresees a first contact with the Luxembourgish language, but it is limited to 16 h as compared to the 80–120 h of French training made available to applicants for international protection.
14 The date indicates the day/month/year when the recording took place.
15 In 2015, Angela Merkel’s open-door policy was an important point of reference for forced migrants attempting to reach Europe.
16 The 9th grade is decisive for accessing future education and vocational training in Luxembourg, especially for those (forced) migrants who do not have a recognised level of education or the required language skills for entering the local training system.