Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development
ISSN: 0143-4632 (Print) 1747-7557 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmmm20
Language use and investment among children and
adolescents of Somali heritage in Sweden
Clara Palm, Natalia Ganuza & Christina Hedman
To cite this article: Clara Palm, Natalia Ganuza & Christina Hedman (2018): Language use and
investment among children and adolescents of Somali heritage in Sweden, Journal of Multilingual
and Multicultural Development, DOI: 10.1080/01434632.2018.1467426
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2018.1467426
© 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group
Published online: 26 Apr 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 35
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rmmm20
JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT, 2018
https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2018.1467426
Language use and investment among children and adolescents of
Somali heritage in Sweden
Clara Palma, Natalia Ganuzab and Christina Hedmanc
a
Department of Swedish, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; bCentre for Research on Bilingualism,
Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden; cDepartment of Language Education, Stockholm University, Stockholm,
Sweden
ABSTRACT
ARTICLE HISTORY
This article explores language use and investment among Somali-speaking
children and adolescents in Sweden, through group interviews and survey
data. Our findings indicate that there are incentives to invest in Somali
language learning considering the reported language use patterns and
the expressed positive attitudes towards Somali mother tongue
instruction. The Somali language was perceived to be ‘naturally’ linked to
Somali identity and to being able to claim ‘Somaliness’, not only by the
adolescents but also by the surroundings. Thus, advanced Somali
language proficiency was perceived as necessary for being able to pass
as ‘culturally authentic’ (Jaffe, A. [2012]. “Multilingual Citizenship and
Minority Languages.” In The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism, edited
by M. Martin-Jones, A. Blackledge, and A. Creese, 83–99. London:
Routledge). Furthermore, being perceived as unproficient in Somali or
unable to transmit the language to future generations was experienced
as guilt-provoking. Nevertheless, the adolescents articulated a compliance
with the dominant linguistic order in Sweden, and their school’s
assimilatory language rules (‘Swedish-only’). This compliance was
associated with good manners and moral behaviour, thus reflecting the
potentially harmful and pervasive nature of assimilatory language
ideology and policy for individual students. The findings exemplify in
many ways the struggles it entails to maintain and develop a minoritised
language in a majority language context and the complex ‘ideological
enterprise’ of language learning with its educational and ethical dilemmas.
Received 23 January 2018
Accepted 16 April 2018
KEYWORDS
Linguistic order; minoritised
language; mother tongue
instruction; Somali–Swedish
bilingualism
Introduction
Many studies have shown the struggles it can entail to maintain and develop a minoritised language
(cf. heritage language) in a majority language context (for an overview, see e.g. García 2009). Generally, these studies have shown that the degree, frequency, and quality of use of a minoritised
language are good predictors of the kind of proficiency young speakers will develop in the language
(e.g. Kim and Pyun 2014; Lü and Koda 2011). Young people’s use of the language will also depend on
the wider society’s attitudes and reactions to the use of the language and to multilingual practices in
general. Furthermore, research has shown that opportunities provided for developing literacy competencies in the language as well as possibilities for engaging in diverse in-and-out-of-school literacy
practices are also crucial for language maintenance (e.g. Baker 2011; Freebody and Freiberg 2001;
Haneda 2006).
CONTACT Clara Palm
clara.palm@svenska.gu.se
© 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2
C. PALM ET AL.
In this article, we explore language use patterns and the incentives to invest in different languages
among young individuals of Somali-speaking heritage in Sweden. This includes an exploration into
the language ideological enterprise that language learning and use encompasses for them (cf. Harris
and Rampton 2003), the relative worth they ascribe to different languages, and their experiences of,
and beliefs about the role of so-called Somali ‘mother tongue instruction’ (henceforth MTI), i.e. the
subject teaching of Somali as offered within the Swedish national curriculum (see further below).
The Somali diaspora in Sweden
As a result of increased global migration, Sweden, as many other countries in Europe, has become
increasingly heterogeneous and multilingual in the last few decades. Many children in Sweden grow
up learning and speaking various languages in addition to Swedish, both inside and outside of their
homes. The immigration to Sweden from the Horn of Africa (Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somaliland, Djibouti) began in the late 1980s, as a consequence of the collapse of the Somali state and the
following years of severe civil wars. The migration has since continued, with a notable peak in the
early 2000s (Open society foundations 2014). As a consequence, there is a relatively large Somali diaspora in Sweden today, and Somali is estimated to be one of the 10 largest languages spoken in Sweden (Sweden Statistics 2015). This can be seen in school statistics in the number of children who are
entitled to Somali MTI in compulsory school. According to recent statistics, 22.9% of all students in
the Swedish compulsory school are entitled to MTI, and 7% of these students are specifically entitled
to Somali MTI (Sweden Statistics 2015). In comparison to most other languages offered through
MTI, the enrolment rate is comparatively high for Somali, that is, a relatively high percentage of
Somali-speaking parents choose to enrol their children in Somali MTI.
MTH in Sweden
As determined by the Swedish Education Act (Utbildningsdepartementet, SFS 2010:800 2010), all
students in Sweden with a parent or a legal guardian who speaks a language other than Swedish
as their ‘mother tongue’ are entitled to MTI on the condition that (a) the language is used on a
daily basis in their home and (b) the student also has a basic knowledge in the language in question
(these two restrictions do not apply to speakers of Sweden’s five national minority languages, who are
entitled to MTI regardless). MTI, as other subjects within the national curriculum, has its own subject syllabus and its own pedagogical goals and subject requirements.
From an international perspective, the legal support for MTI appears quite impressive, but one
can also argue that the implementation of the MTI policy has never been on par with its robust
legal foundation (e.g. Ganuza and Hedman 2015; Hyltenstam and Milani 2012; Lainio 2013). Unlike
other subjects in the curriculum, MTI is a non-mandatory subject, which means that parents need to
actively request tuition for their children. A provision in the Ordinance for compulsory school
(Utbildningsdepartementet, SFS 2011:185 2011, Ch. 5, §10) also prescribes that municipalities are
only obliged to arrange for MTI if there are at least five students requesting instruction in the
same language, and if they are able to find a suitable teacher in the language. This means that not
all students who are entitled to or request MTI in fact receive it. When offered, MTI entails approximately 40 minutes of instruction per week. Many MTI teachers can attest that this time is insufficient
in order to fulfil the MTI subject requirements (e.g. Ganuza and Hedman 2015).
On behalf of the Language Council of Sweden, Spetz (2014) conducted a written survey on the
organisation of MTI, which was sent to 290 municipalities in Sweden. The results showed that
only about a quarter of the municipalities participating in the survey were able to provide MTI to
all students who had requested it. In addition, surveys were also sent to Finnish-, Persian-, and
Somali-speaking families with the intention of investigating parents’ attitudes to MTI, and their
reasons for having decided to enrol, or not enrol, their children in MTI. The majority of the parents
considered MTI to be advantageous for their children’s development of language competencies in
JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
3
the ‘mother tongue’, and also for strengthening their children’s ‘cultural identity’. The majority of the
Somali-speaking parents also considered MTI to be favourable for their children’s Swedish development and for their school results in general.
Despite all of these above-mentioned limitations, studies have shown that participation in MTI
has a positive impact on students’ language and literacy competencies in the minoritised language
(e.g. Bylund and Diaz 2012; Ganuza and Hedman 2017a), and on their school achievements in
general (e.g. Ganuza and Hedman, forthcoming; Skolverket 2008).
Aims and theoretical considerations
The overarching aim of this article is to gain a deeper understanding of language use and investments among young individuals of Somali-speaking heritage in Sweden. We do this by studying
their articulations of subjective positions regarding language use and the relative value they
ascribe to different languages, mainly within educational contexts but also in regard to domestic
realms. In the article, we analyse and discuss how students’ positioning index and relate to both
large-scale societal discourses and to local discourses of language, education, and the relative
worth of languages.
In our analyses, language ideologies are understood as ‘beliefs, or feelings, about languages as used
in their social worlds’ (Kroskrity 2006, 498) and ‘dominant’ ideologies are here seen as those that
historically have been imposed by society and subsequently come to be embodied, internalised,
and viewed as natural by most people (Kroskrity 2006).
Studies have shown how institutions, in particular, educational institutions, often tend to be leading in the production and reproduction of language hegemonic structures (cf. Heller and MartinJones 2001), thereby contributing to the power of hierarchy between different languages in the
society at large. In Sweden, Swedish is prescribed as the official and principal language in the
Language Act (Kulturdepartementet, SFS 2009: 600 2009). It is also the main language of schooling,
and the perceived ‘natural’ language, following the logic of historical language hegemony in Sweden
(Lindberg 2009; Salö 2016). Hult (2012), who succeeded Josephson (2004), visually represents Sweden’s current linguistic order in the form of a hierarchic pyramid, where Swedish, closely followed by
English, is on the top of the pyramid, other major European languages as well as the other Scandinavian languages are placed in the middle, and the recognised national minority languages (Samí,
Meankiäli, Finnish, Jiddish, and Romani chib) and the so-called newer immigrant languages at
the bottom-end of the pyramid.
Closely related to language ideology, is Bonny Norton Peirce’s (1995) idea about investment
(Peirce 1995), which brings to the fore the social aspects of language learning. With reference to
the economic metaphors of Bourdieu, an investment in a language is perceived to be worthwhile
when the language-learning endeavour can be converted into a cultural and a social capital. Thus,
learners’ investment in a language is dependent on their understanding of how language learning
will ‘increase the value of their cultural capital and social power’ (Darvin and Norton 2015, 37).
How this enterprise relates to ideology is illustrated in Darvin and Norton (2015).
The valuing of their capital is an affirmation of their identity, a legitimation of their rightful place in different
learning contexts. At the same time, because of the pull of ideology, the capital they possess may not be
accorded symbolic value by structures of power, or the capital they desire becomes difficult to attain because
of systemic patterns of control. (Darvin and Norton 2015, 46)
Apart from the social aspects of language learning, the language learner’s agency is also a key component in this model. Hence, in our analyses of data, we take into account the notion of investment
as well as the prominent role of human agency.
Furthermore, in addition to Norton’s model of investment and identity, we also account for
Michel Foucault’s notion of ethics (cf. Foucault 1983; Foucault and Blasius 1993), as ethical dimensions may also be related to language use – as part of an individual’s ‘self-formation’ or identity.
4
C. PALM ET AL.
According to Foucault, the construction of the individual subject includes ‘the means by which we
change ourselves in order to become ethical subjects’ (Foucault 1983, 239) or ‘the kind of being to
which we aspire when we behave in a moral way’ (239). Thus, Foucault’s ethics ‘determines how the
individual is supposed to constitute himself as a moral subject of his own actions’ (238). These ethical
dimensions of self-forming activities relate to an imagined identity, which is different from that
introduced by Peirce (1995). According to Foucault, ethical self-formation requires work on the
self by the self in various explicit and implicit ways, for example through bodily expressions as
well as thoughts and beliefs.
Methodology
Participants and data
In the article, we draw mainly on data from three group interviews with adolescents of Somalispeaking background, which were conducted by the first author of this article as a part of a
research essay that she wrote in connection with the teacher training programme (Palm 2016).
As a point of comparison we also draw on background data on the language and literacy practices of 120 six- to twelve-year-old students of Somali-speaking background, which was collected
as a part of a research project conducted by the second and the third author (e.g. Ganuza and
Hedman 2017a, Forthcoming). About a third of the younger participants went to the same school
as the adolescents in the group interviews. One common trait for the participants from both of
these data sets is that they have grown up in Somali-speaking families in Sweden. The majority of
them were born in Sweden, or came to Sweden at an early age. Most of them live in areas where
relatively many people of Somali-speaking heritage have settled, and to where there is a continued flux of migration from the Horn of Africa.
The group interviews were conducted with a total of 13 students in the 9th grade. The only
criterion for recruitment for the interviews was that the students had experience of MTI. All but
two of the students interviewed reported that they currently attended Somali MTI, while the
other two reported that they were enrolled in Arabic MTI. The group interviews were conducted
during school hours, in groups of 3–4 students. Each interview lasted for 40–50 minutes. All participants were informed of the purpose of the interviews and they gave their oral and written
consent to participation in the study. The group interviews followed a semi-structured format
and focused in particular on the participants’ language use, their experiences of MTI and their
experiences of and beliefs about language and multilingualism. All interviews were audiorecorded and later transcribed.
The data from the background survey were collected as part of a research project on the role of
MTI for students’ literacy proficiency in the so-called mother tongue (e.g. Ganuza and Hedman
2017a). The project focused in particular on Somali language acquisition and Somali MTI. The background survey was conducted orally and individually, based on a written questionnaire, which
included questions about the participants’ language and literacy biography and use. The survey
was conducted prior to a larger set of tests of vocabulary and reading in Somali and Swedish. In
this paper, we only report results from the background survey.
As mentioned previously, about a third of the younger participants who responded to the survey
went to the same school as the adolescents who participated in the group interviews. All of these
participants attended a private school, with a Muslim profile, which is located in a larger Swedish
city. The school receives many students of Somali-speaking background. The school follows the
national Swedish curriculum, but students also have some lessons dedicated to Islam. Almost all
of the students in this school attended MTI, and MTI attendance is encouraged by the school’s principal as well as the teachers. Nevertheless, as will be discussed below, the school also has a language
use policy that urges students, and teachers, to always use Swedish in the school, except during MTI,
English and modern language classes.
JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
5
Findings
Reported language use and language use expectations
The majority of the young respondents to the language and literacy background survey reported that
they speak ‘mostly’ or ‘only’ Somali at home with both of their parents (see also Ganuza and Hedman
2017a). A smaller number of respondents reported that they used ‘Somali and Swedish equally
much’, and relatively few that they used Swedish more than Somali at home with parents. Only
one respondent out of the 120 reported that s/he used ‘only Swedish’ with parents. Reported
language use with siblings and friends showed the opposite pattern, that is, the large majority
reported that they speak ‘mostly’ or ‘only’ Swedish with their siblings and friends, some that they
use Swedish and Somali equally much, and only a few that they speak ‘mostly’ or ‘only’ Somali
with their siblings and friends. These reported language use patterns are similar to those reported
in many other studies, that is, comparatively more use of the minoritised language with parents,
and comparatively less use of the minoritised language with siblings and friends, with whom the
language of the wider society tends to dominate (e.g. Aitsiselmi 2004; Boyd 1985; Gregory 2001;
Obied 2009; Yamamoto 2001). The majority of the young respondents also reported that they currently attended Somali MTI and had done so for more than one year (96 of the 120 respondents).
The overall language use patterns reported by the adolescents in the group interviews were practically the same, although the adolescents gave a more comprehensive and detailed description of
their language use patterns. In general, the adolescents explained that they rarely spoke ‘only Somali’
in their everyday encounters. Instead, their out-of-school language practices tended to be characterised by an interchangeable use of Somali and Swedish: ‘it’s like Swenglish but Swedish and Somali
instead’, as one of the interviewees put it. The adolescents claimed that they rarely thought of
their languages as separate, as exemplified in excerpt 1.
Excerpt 1:
Faduma:
Amira:
Faduma:
It feels like you’re speaking one language […] we just mix it together, it all comes naturally.
It’s like one.
It just comes naturally.
The excerpt exemplifies how the adolescents experienced their everyday multilingual use as something natural and seamless, at least among peers in certain local discourses. However, this multilingual use did not mean that they were not aware of their own and/or other’s language use. On the
contrary, they recounted how they navigated their linguistic use in accordance with the surrounding,
in relation to who might or might not understand and in relation to what language use was expected.
Meanwhile, the participants expressed that they sometimes found it uncomfortable if their multilingual practices excluded friends who do not know Somali well enough to partake in the conversation. Thus, the adolescents’ language use was to some extent also governed by courtesy (excerpt 2).
Excerpt 2:
Shadya:
Sometimes it can be difficult, well, as you are used to talk with your friend like that because most
of them are Somalis here, but some don’t understand and that can be hard, well it is not something you mean or, like, to backbite someone or so.
Excerpt 2 also reveals a fear of how ‘wrong’ language use may entail a risk of being viewed as someone who backbites or even cheats in class: ‘If you have a class with a teacher who does not understand
what you say, the teacher might think that you talk about them or maybe cheat’, as another participant pointed out. The (un)official language policy in the adolescents’ school was to use Swedish only
when in school (outside of MTI, English, and modern languages). Students who did not comply with
these language regulations tended to be reprimanded by the school staff, and sometimes also by their
peers (see also Ganuza and Hedman 2015, 2017b). Some of the articulated reasons for this language
regulation rule were to avoid exclusion and abusive language. Most of the students also defended the
school’s language rule and agreed that one should always use Swedish when in school in order to
6
C. PALM ET AL.
avoid excluding anybody. In this way, the role and use of Swedish become entangled with ideologies
of inclusion and good and moral behaviour.
What these different examples show is how the adolescents adapt their language use in fine-tuned
ways in order to ‘fit in’ and meet the varying expectations in different interactional contexts. Here, it
is important to note the role of language beyond ‘conveying meanings’, that is, how it acts as a means
to position oneself and perform or represent identities (cf. Rampton 1995).
Both the young respondents to the language and literacy background survey and the adolescents
in the group interviews tended to rate their proficiency in Swedish higher than their proficiency in
Somali, especially for reading and writing. One of the participants even associated lack of minority
language proficiency to a sense of collective weakness (in the context of a diaspora). However, the
adolescents explained that they had the impression that people around them, especially teachers
in the school, often expect them to be more proficient in Somali than in Swedish, as if ‘being Somali’
automatically means that they are able to speak Somali at a high level of proficiency. This was, for
example, visible in a statement by one of the participants who claimed that ‘it’s like it’s already a fact
that we should know Somali so well just because we’re Somalis’ and, likewise, by another who
claimed that ‘they look at us like we’ve just arrived from Somalia, and at the same time I don’t
even know Somali, I don’t know it, like I’ve never even been there’.
During the visits to the school, the authors also experienced how some of the staff referred to this
imagined abundant use of Somali, and how they used this as an argument for justifying why the
school should be an exclusive space for learning and using Swedish only, because ‘where else will
they hear Swedish’.
Although some adolescents questioned the assumption that ‘being Somali’ and having Somali as
your ‘mother tongue’ automatically means knowing how to speak Somali, almost all of them still
stressed the importance of knowing Somali – often referred to as ‘my’ or ‘our’ language – in
order to be able to claim ‘Somali identity’ or ‘Somaliness’ (cf. Bigelow 2010). As one participant
put it: ‘Knowing your language strengthens the sense of fellowship. If you know the language you
feel like you belong to the people who speak that language’. Accordingly ‘losing the language’
would, for the same reason, entail losing a culture. As a consequence of this assumed link between
language and identity, many of the adolescents feared what the result might be should they not be
able to learn and use Somali well enough, or should they be unable to pass the language on to future
generations (see excerpt 3; cf. Bigelow and Tarone 2004).
Excerpt 3:
Amira:
Faduma:
Beyla:
Like our next, our children, like our parents’ grandchildren, what are the odds that they will know
their language?
Exactly. That’s why it’s so important for us to learn Somali so that like the next generation. The
odds are not that high that they will know Somali very well, or even understand perhaps. But at
the same time you can only try your best
But like the language is all we have with us from our country. You know it is an important part of
us. It’s important, I think.
In fact, a large part of the group interviews centred round issues related to the participants’ proficiency in Somali and their fear of not being proficient ‘enough’, something which was perceived
as a shortcoming and as a potential source for embarrassment (see excerpt 4).
Excerpt 4:
Khadija:
Shadya:
Interviewer:
Sara:
Shadya:
Most people want to know their own language. You want to be able to feel proud of your
country and such.
It’s embarrassing to like not know if somebody else knows
Can you give an example of when it was embarrassing?
Like there are certain Somalis. I speak with my own cousins and they don’t know Somali that
well, they speak English. And then when I speak like simple Somali they don’t understand. And
that can be embarrassing for them.
And sometimes like if you’re seeing your grandmother or somebody who doesn’t know Swedish, then you can’t express yourself. You don’t understand each other. You can’t communicate.
JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
Sara:
Hafsa:
7
They get like shocked. Don’t you know Somali?
There’s a guy in our class. Even though he’s Somali he doesn’t know the language. But he has to
he needs to attend the Somali lessons. So that’s embarrassing for him. Like you ask him something and he can’t say it in Somali. You know, he doesn’t even know the basics. So that’s
embarrassing.
What these different examples reveal is how the Somali language is perceived as an important and
constitutive factor of the participants’ individual, as well as collective identities (cf. May 2012). Here,
advanced Somali language use even becomes part of a normative or ‘moral behavior’, pivotal to the
‘right’ or ‘good’ way of ‘Somaliness’ (cf. Foucault 1983, 239), given the feelings of embarrassment and
shame that not knowing Somali seems to render. The participants in excerpt 5 expressed embarrassment not only for the individual who does not ‘know’ Somali but also for the listeners. These
examples show how the adolescents tend to presume the existence of an essentialist connection
between linguistic competence and ethnic identity (e.g. Ag and Jørgensen 2013; Stroud 2004), possibly forming a notion of an imagined ideal ‘self’ (cf. the notion of ‘ethical self’, Foucault 1983). Moreover, the participants’ statements show how they tend to see themselves and be seen by others as
‘culturally inauthentic’ (Jaffe 2012) when they only reach limited levels of minority language
competence.
The role and valorisation of Somali MTI
All of the adolescents in the group interviews reported that they currently attended MTI, as did most
of the other students at their school. As mentioned previously, many students of Somali-speaking
background attend this particular school. One could argue that their school has been successful in
promoting MTI and in achieving a high rate of MTI attendance, for example, by integrating MTI
during the ordinary school hours (and not in the late afternoons as is done in most other schools),
and by locally employing several MTI teachers, who are present and visible in the school every day.
However, despite these favourable circumstances the students do not receive more hours of MTI
than in other schools, and MTI is also not particularly well integrated with other school subjects
(cf. Ganuza and Hedman 2015). During the group interviews, MTI was regarded by the adolescents
as a school subject with unquestioned legitimacy within the premises of the local school. All participants agreed that MTI is important and that one should enrol if entitled to it, despite it not being a
mandatory subject. They also stressed their parents’ appreciation of MTI and considered MTI to be
an important arena for maintaining and developing their proficiency in Somali, particularly their
literacy skills (see excerpt 5).
Excerpt 5
Nadifa:
Jamilla:
Faduma:
Well, we don’t only learn Somali, we develop it.
Well look, we knew Somali and so on when we were little kids but we learned how to spell Somali
when we received instruction.
Spelling, well, it is a big difference between speaking Somali and writing Somali […].
Students with experiences from other schools claimed that their possibilities to draw on their Somali
language repertoire were greater in this particular school, due to the presence of many other Somalispeaking students. Many of them also expressed concerns that there would be fewer opportunities for
Somali language use after their transition to upper secondary school. Still, within MTI, some of them
felt that they were unable to negotiate how their use of Somali in Sweden may differ from uses of
Somali as practiced in the ‘traditional homelands’ (cf. Ganuza and Hedman 2015; Canagarajah
2013). As exemplified in the authors’ earlier studies (e.g. Ganuza and Hedman 2017b), many MTI
teachers tended to embody and practice purist ideologies of the minoritised ‘mother tongue’ during
the MTI lessons, something which the adolescents claimed to have experienced. However, the participants also told about their positive experiences of an earlier Somali MTI teacher who had been
8
C. PALM ET AL.
familiar with and permissive of ways of using Somali typical of children and adolescents in Sweden,
as exemplified in excerpt 6.
Excerpt 6:
Iana:
Nadifa:
Hafsa:
Our previous teacher he had children in Sweden and he understood their Somali so he understood our Somali, you see, the Somali in Sweden.
He worked here a long time so he understood how we talked […].
And there is a difference between adolescents speaking Somali here and adolescents speaking
Somali in Somalia.
This teacher’s understanding and shown valorisation of the students’ linguistic and cultural
resources was perceived by the students as an important motivational factor for using Somali.
According to Norton and Darvin’s model of investment (2015), learners’ investment in a language
is dependent on to what extent their linguistic capital is recognised and to what extent and how it
‘can serve as affordances to their learning’ (46). The teacher’s affirmation of their linguistic capital
was, hence, perceived as an affirmation of their identity and ‘a legitimation of their rightful place’
(46) in the MTI learning context.
Embodiment of the established linguistic order
Despite the valorisation of Somali (see above), Swedish was seen as the language of highest prestige
and as the unquestionable lingua franca of the school. Swedish was discursively considered to be the
‘natural’ and most prioritised language, as exemplified in excerpt 7.
Excerpt 7:
Amira:
Faduma:
Amira:
Amira:
Jamilla:
Well one prioritizes Swedish.
Yeah.
Well one prioritizes the language depending on the country. If you’re in England then you prioritize English because that what you’ll have the most use for.
You know, we are in Sweden, right.
You know, if we were in Somalia then Somali would be most important, but we are here now.
Most of the students expressed that they value multilingualism, that ‘the more languages you know
the better’, and also stressed that multilingualism would be a valorised asset by future employers,
‘that is what the employers want, that one should know many languages’. Nonetheless, when it
came to Somali, the adolescents expressed that they did not think that they would be able to use
it neither in future studies nor in their future professional life, unless they got a job as an MTI teacher
or as an interpreter. When the first author asked the students whether they wanted to be able to use
Somali more frequently in school, for example, for learning subjects other than MTI, they declined
and claimed that the MTI lessons were enough for their needs (see excerpt 8).
Excerpt 8:
Interviewer:
Shadya:
Hafsa:
Interviewer:
Hafsa:
Would you like to use Somali when you have for example classes in Sciences or in Social
sciences?
I think it is enough because we still need to learn things and Sciences is rather important for us.
Well when it comes to Sciences and Social sciences we don’t know any like Somali notions. They
don’t exist in Somali. We can’t use them.
But would you like to be able to use them?
No, it’s easier in Swedish.
The adolescents’ valorisation of different languages is in analogy with ideologies of so-called
immigrant bilingualism, that is, the students argue that the main reasons for Somali language
maintenance and use is for personal gains and for the development of a desired Somali cultural
identity, but less so for instrumental reasons such as social, career and economic relevance
(cf. Arthur 2004). However, there were a few rare occasions during the interviews when
some students questioned MTI’s and Somali’s marginalised role in education. For example,
one participant reasoned that MTI should at least be assigned as much teaching time as modern
JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
9
languages in the curriculum, ‘if we have Spanish twice, then I think we should be able to have
Somali twice a week too, at least’.
Discussion
The results of this study show that there are incentives for children and adolescents of Somali-speaking background in Sweden to invest in Somali language learning and identity. The majority of the
younger children reported that they spoke ‘mostly’ or ‘only’ Somali at home with both of their
parents, and the adolescents stressed the importance of knowing Somali in their daily lives and
took it for granted that one should attend Somali MTI in order to develop the language. In fact,
all of the adolescents, as well as a majority of the young participants in the survey, currently attended
Somali MTI. The adolescents’ positive attitudes towards Somali and MTI were likely, at least in part,
a result of their local school’s successful encouragement of MTI attendance.
A prominent trait in the interviews was the perception of Somali language to be ‘naturally’ linked
to Somali identity, as Somali language proficiency was considered necessary for being able to claim
‘Somaliness’ (cf. Bigelow 2010) and for being able to pass as ‘culturally authentic’ (Jaffe 2012). As a
consequence of this perceived essentialist linkage, feelings of not being proficient ‘enough’ in Somali,
for example, in order to be able to transmit the language to future generations, was experienced as
guilt-provoking. One participant expressed embarrassment caused by someone’s lack of Somali proficiency in MTI class, not only for the speaker but also for the listeners. Thus, high language proficiency seems to usurp a central role for ‘real’ or ‘good’ ‘Somaliness’.
Paradoxically, while the adolescents expressed their fear of not being proficient enough in Somali,
they simultaneously claimed that others often expect the opposite; given an essentialist view that
‘being and looking Somali’ automatically implies Somali language proficiency. This was, however,
contested by the adolescents as some of them claimed that ‘I don’t even know Somali, I don’t
know it, like I’ve never been there.’ The adolescents also thought that many of their teachers believed
that they spoke only, or mostly, Somali outside of school, despite this not being the case. These statements reveal a perceived mismatch between others’ expectations for their language use and identity
and the adolescents’ own perception, that is, a mismatch in the dynamics between the identities chosen by the self and the identities chosen for the individual by others (Blackledge and Pavlenko 2001;
Zienkowski 2017).
Although the adolescents expressed generally positive attitudes towards multilingualism, Somali,
and Somali MTI, they simultaneously articulated beliefs that reflected a compliance with the linguistic order advocated both by the school and by the Swedish society at large (cf. Hult 2012). This compliance was, for example, visible in their overt understanding of the school’s assimilatory language
regulation rules (i.e. ‘Swedish-only’). By using languages that teachers do not understand, the adolescents risked being thought of in negative terms, as the use of Swedish was seen as a precaution
against exclusion, abusive language, and cheating. One consequence, albeit unintentional, is that
Swedish language use then becomes associated with good manners and moral behaviour (cf. Jonsson
2015), disregarding the fact that the unwanted behaviour could possibly also happen in Swedish.
Such a consequence reflects how language usage norms and regulations may become entangled
with ethic dimensions in intrinsic ways. In fact, regulations of language, apart from language/bodily
expressions, also include thoughts and beliefs and as in this case; moral grounds. Hence, these regulations may even target which language use is – and is not – to be considered to be part of an imagined ideal or ‘better’ self (cf. Foucault’s notion of ethical self-formation), which points to the
pervasive and potentially harmful nature of assimilatory language ideologies and policies for the
individual.
As documented in previous research on minoritised language use, the interviewed adolescents
tended to associate Somali language use mainly with sentimental values, the home and the personal
sphere, and less with instrumental values pertaining to upward social mobility and empowerment
10
C. PALM ET AL.
(cf. Cabau 2014). Thus, in spite of the fact that the students aspired for identity claims such as ‘Somaliness’, they never challenged the dominant linguistic order in the group interviews.
In the participants’ accounts, investments in Somali language learning and use can be converted
into cultural and social capital in certain respects. For example, in alignment with Darvin and Norton (2015), one could argue that the adolescents’ ‘desire to be part of an imagined community’ (Darvin and Norton 2015, 47) and to be able to claim ‘Somaliness’ renders them important incentives to
invest in Somali language learning and use. The school’s encouragement and valorisation of Somali
MTI also plays an important role in providing incentives to invest in Somali. However, many of the
adolescents expressed uncertainty about being able to continue to use and invest as much in Somali
after transitioning to upper secondary school. The value and prestige ascribed to Somali in the local
school context could be viewed as a form of resistance to the wider institutional and social order
upheld in Sweden (Heller and Mc Laughlin 2016). However, this local resistance will unlikely
have any effect on the perceived value and use of Somali in the wider society. That is, the relative
worth ascribed to Somali will most likely remain local, which reveals a consolidated power structure.
In sum, this study highlights the complex ‘ideological enterprise’ of language learning and its educational and ethical dilemmas. The findings also exemplify the struggles it entails to maintain and
develop a minoritised language in a majority language context and/or in a context of diaspora.
The strength of the prevailing linguistic structure as well as linguistic and ethnic essentialism cannot
be overlooked as those dimensions are deeply intertwined in the students’ narratives. However, nor
may any examples of student agency that counteract linguistic hegemony, essentialism, and purism
be overlooked in order to more closely account for – and understand – the relationship between
institutional processes and legitimating ideologies of language (Heller and Mc Laughlin 2016).
The findings reflect both counteracts and compliance with linguistic hegemony, which possibly constitute everyday life of all the multilingual participants in the study. Although we may not easily find
conditions that manage to break the ‘glass roof’ of the prevailing linguistic order, we still need to
continue studying the value that language users attribute to languages in a wider context (cf. Blommaert 2005).
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Hallfríður Helgadóttir for correcting the English.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
This work was supported by Vetenskapsrådet [721-2012-4275].
References
Ag, A., and J. N. Jørgensen. 2013. “Ideologies, Norms, and Practices in Youth Poly-languaging.” International Journal
of Bilingualism 17 (4): 525–539.
Aitsiselmi, F. 2004. Linguistic Diversity and the Use of English in the Home Environment: A Bradford Case Study.
Bradford: Department of Languages and European Studies, School of Social and International Studies,
University of Bradford.
Arthur, J. 2004. “Language at the Margins: The Case of Somali in Liverpool.” Language Problems and Language
Planning 28 (3): 217–240. doi:10.1075/lplp.28.3.01art.
Baker, C. 2011. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 5th ed. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Bigelow, M. 2010. Mogadishu on the Mississippi: Language, Racialized Identity and Education in a New Land.
New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
11
Bigelow, M., and E. Tarone. 2004. “The Role of Literacy Level in Second Language Acquisition: Doesn’t Who We Study
Determine What We Know?” TESOL Quarterly 38 (4): 689–710.
Blackledge, A., and A. Pavlenko. 2001. “Negotiation of Identities in Multilingual Contexts.” International Journal of
Bilingualism 5 (3): 243–257.
Blommaert, J. 2005. Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boyd, S. 1985. “Language Survival. A Study of Language Contact, Language Shift and Language Choice in Sweden.”
PhD diss., Göteborgs universitet, Göteborg.
Bylund, E., and M. Diaz. 2012. “The Effects of Heritage Language Instruction on First Language Proficiency: A
Psycholinguistic Perspective.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 15 (5): 593–609.
Cabau, B. 2014. “Minority Language Education Policy and Planning in Sweden.” Current Issues in Language Planning
15 (4): 409–425.
Canagarajah, A. S. 2013. Translingual Practice: Global Englishes and Cosmopolitan Relations. Abingdon: Routledge.
Darvin, R., and B. Norton. 2015. “Identity and a Model of Investment in Applied Linguistics.” Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics 35: 36–56. doi:10.1017/S026719051400.
Foucault, M. 1983. “On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress.” In Beyond Structuralism and
Hermeneutics, edited by H. L. Dreyfus and P. Rabinow, 2nd ed., 229–252. Chicago, IL: The University of
Chicago Press.
Foucault, M., and M. Blasius. 1993. “About the Beginning of the Hermeneutics of the Self: Two Lectures at
Dartmouth.” Political Theory 21 (2): 198–227.
Freebody, P., and J. Freiberg. 2001. “Re-discovering Practical Reading Activities in Homes and Schools.” Journal of
Research in Reading 24: 222–234.
Ganuza, N., and C. Hedman. 2015. “Struggles for Legitimacy in Mother Tongue Instruction in Sweden.” Language and
Education 20 (2): 125–139.
Ganuza, N., and C. Hedman. 2017a. “The Impact of Mother Tongue Instruction on the Development of Biliteracy:
Evidence from Somali–Swedish bilinguals.” Applied Linguistics. doi:10.1093/applin/amx010.
Ganuza, N., and C. Hedman, 2017b. “Ideology vs. Practice: Is there a Space for Pedagogical Translanguaging in Mother
Tongue Instruction?” In New Perspectives on Translanguaging and Education, edited by B. A. Paulsrud, J. Rosén, B.
Straszer and Å. Wedin, 208–226. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ganuza, N., and C. Hedman. Forthcoming. “Modersmålsundervisning, läsförståelse och betyg –
modersmålsundervisningens roll för elevers skolresultat” [Mother tongue instruction, reading comprehension
and grades – the role of mother tongue instruction for students’ school results]. To appear in Nordand. Nordisk
tidsskrift for andrespråksforskning 2018 (1).
García, O. 2009. Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Gregory, E. 2001. “Sisters and Brothers as Language and Literacy Teachers: Synergy Between Siblings Playing and
Working Together.” The Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 1 (3): 301–322.
Haneda, M. 2006. “Becoming Literate in a Second Language: Connecting Home, Community, and School Literacy
Practices.” Theory Into Practice 45 (4): 337–345.
Harris, R., and B. Rampton, eds. 2003. The Language, Ethnicity and Race Reader. London: Routledge.
Heller, M., and M. Martin-Jones, eds. 2001. Voices of Authority: Education and Linguistic Difference. Stamford, CT:
Ablex.
Heller, M., and M. Mc Laughlin. 2016. “Language Choice and Symbolic Domination.” In Discourse and Education,
edited by S. Wortham, K. Deoksoon, and S. May, 87–95. Cham: Springer International.
Hult, F. M. 2012. “English as a Transcultural Language in Swedish Policy and Practice.” TESOL Quarterly 46 (2): 230–
257. doi:10.1002/tesq.19.
Hyltenstam, K., and M. Milani. 2012. “Flerspråkighetens sociopolitiska och sociokulturella ramar.” In Flerspråkighet:
en forskningsöversikt, edited by Vetenskapsrådet, 17–152. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet, 29:2.
Jaffe, A. 2012. “Multilingual Citizenship and Minority Languages.” In The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism,
edited by M. Martin-Jones, A. Blackledge, and A. Creese, 83–99. London: Routledge.
Jonsson, R. 2015. Värst i klassen. Berättelser om stökiga pojkar i innerstad och förort. Stockholm: Ordfront.
Josephson, O. 2004. ‘Ju’. Ifrågasatta självklarheter om svenskan, engelskan och alla andra språk i Sverige. Stockholm:
Norstedts.
Kim, E. C., and O. D. Pyun. 2014. “Heritage Language Literacy Maintenance: A Study of Korean-American Heritage
Learners.” Language, Culture and Curriculum 27 (3): 294–315.
Kroskrity, P. V. 2006. “Language Ideologies.” In A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, edited by A. Duranti, 496–
517. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Kulturdepartementet [Ministry of Culture]. 2009. Språklag, SFS 2009:600 [The Swedish Language Act, SFS 2009:600].
Stockholm: Kulturdepartementet.
Lainio, J. 2013. “Modersmåls erkända och negligerade roller.” In Symposium 2012: Lärararrollen i svenska som
andraspråk, edited by M. Olofsson, 66–90. Stockholm: Stockholms universitets förlag.
Lindberg, I. 2009. “I det nya mångspråkiga Sverige.” Utbildning och demokrati 18 (2): 9–37.
12
C. PALM ET AL.
Lü, C., and K. Koda. 2011. “Impact of Home Language and Literacy Support on English-Chinese Biliteracy Acquisition
Among Chinese Heritage Language Learners.” Heritage Language Journal 8: 44–80.
May, S. 2012. “Language Rights: Promoting Civic Multilingualism.” In The Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism,
edited by M. Martin-Jones, A. Blackledge, and A. Creese, 131–142. London: Routledge.
Obied, V. 2009. “How do Siblings Shape the Language Environment in Bilingual Families?” International Journal of
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 12 (6): 705–720. doi:10.1080/13670050802699485.
Open Society Foundations. 2014. Somalis in Malmo. New York: Open Society Foundations. https://www.
opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/somalis-malmo.
Palm, C. 2016. “Modersmål – undervisning, bruk och legitimitet. En intervjustudie om högstadieelevers syn på
modersmålsundervisning och modersmål.” Master Thesis. Stockholms universitet, Institutionen för språkdidaktik.
Peirce, B. N. 1995. “Social Identity, Investment and Language Learning.” TESOL Quarterly 29 (1): 9–31. doi:10.2307/
3587803.
Rampton, B. 1995. Crossing: Language and Ethnicity Among Adolescents. London: Longman.
Salö, L. 2016. “Languages and Linguistic Exchanges in Swedish Academia: Practices, Processes, and Globalizing
Markets.” PhD diss., Stockholms universitet, Stockholm.
Skolverket [The Swedish National Agency for Education]. 2008. Med annat modersmål – elever i grundskolan och skolans verksamhet. Rapport 321. Stockholm: Skolverket.
Spetz, J. 2014. Debatterad och marginaliserad: Perspektiv på modersmålsundervisningen. Reports from the Language
Council of Sweden 6. Stockholm: The Language Council of Sweden.
Stroud, C. 2004. “Rinkeby Swedish and Semilingualism in Language Ideological Debates: A Bourdieuan Perspective.”
Journal of Sociolinguistics 8 (2): 196–214.
Sweden Statistics, SCB. 2015. Utbildningsstatistisk årsbok 2015. Statistiska centralbyrån. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=
urn:nbn:se:scb-2014-uf01br1401_pdf.
Utbildningsdepartementet [Ministry of Education and Research]. 2010. Skollagen, SFS 2010:800 [The Swedish
Education Act, SFS 2010:800]. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet.
Utbildningsdepartementet [Ministry of Education and Research]. 2011. Skolförordning, SFS 2011:185 [The Ordinance
for Compulsory School, SFS 2011:185]. Stockholm: Utbildningsdepartementet.
Yamamoto, M. 2001. Language Use in Interlingual Families: A Japanese-English Sociolinguistic Study. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Zienkowski, J. 2017. Articlulations of Self and Politics in Activist Discourse. A Discourse Analysis of Critical Subjectivities
in Minority Debates. Cham: Springer International.