2 essays (CM549)

Viewing Family Relations Through a Linguistic Lens: Symbolic Aspects

of Language Maintenance in Immigrant Families

Michal Tannenbaum School of Education

Tel Aviv University, Israel

Immigration often involves language shifts, and dilemmas bearing on language maintenance. This article discusses some of the psychological implications of mother tongue maintenance and of complete language shift, especially in the com- munication between parents and children. The article suggests a novel perspective on language maintenance in immigrant families by drawing on attachment theory and discussing various aspects of language maintenance in relation to intimate family ex- periences. This qualitative study focused on the parents’ perspective on various is- sues related to their mother tongue and the influence of early experiences on their current language behavior with their children. Interviews were conducted with seven immigrant families living in Sydney, Australia. Central themes that emerged from their narratives, related to language and family relations in the past and at present, are analyzed and discussed in light of psychological motives and emotional aspects re- lated to language maintenance patterns in these families.

Language maintenance and language acquisition among immigrants from ethnolinguistic minorities are widely researched subjects, basically viewing the immigrants’ acquisition of the majority language as imperative. Language fluency is an integral part of the acculturation process and various studies point out the pos- itive relation between the immigrant’s well-being in terms of economic, academic, professional, or personal aspects, and language proficiency (e.g., Masgoret & Gardner, 1999; Weston, 1996). Acquiring a new language as part of the immigra- tion process often results in bilingualism, which researchers almost unanimously judge to be a positive phenomena, including such advantages as metalinguistic

THE JOURNAL OF FAMILY COMMUNICATION, 5(3), 229–252 Copyright © 2005, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michal Tannenbaum, School of Ed- ucation, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel 69978. E-mail: [email protected]

awareness, improved school performance, cultural enrichment, and psychological resilience (e.g., Goodz, 1994; Hakuta & Diaz, 1985; Titone, 1989).

Language shift as part of the immigration process, however, is not a simple or technical act, and it does not reflect only the acquisition of a new language and the broadening of one’s horizons. The immigration process also involves loss on many levels, and language shift often involves language loss with all its attendant emo- tional, interactional, and psychological significance. Most of the studies exploring language maintenance and language shift among immigrants focus on characteris- tics of the ethnolinguistic group, on the language per se, or on demographic vari- ables associated with language maintenance (e.g., Butcher, 1995; Clyne & Kipp, 1997; De Vries, 1993; Giles, Bourhis, & Taylor, 1977; Taft & Cahill, 1989), and rarely address the emotional significance of this process. The few studies that do address language maintenance as associated with emotional aspects, self-identity issues, or internal representations of significant others, describe mainly clinical case studies, psychological theories, or personal literary narratives. Thus, Hoffman (1989) described the helplessness that accompanied the acquisition of a new lan- guage as part of her immigration experience stating, “mostly, the problem is that the signifier has become severed from the signified. The words I learn now don’t stand for things in the same unquestioned way they did in my native tongue” (p. 106; see also Stengel, 1939). Grinberg and Grinberg (1989) described the mother tongue as containing the experiences of infancy, including memories and feelings related to first object relations, and as one of the most traditional components of culture, highly resistant to change. Based on his own experience after his arrival in England, Freud wrote to Raymond de Saussure the following: “one point that the emigrant feels so particularly painfully…is…the loss of the language in which one had lived and which one will never be able to replace with another” (quoted in Gay, 1988, p. 632). Mirsky posited that losing the mother tongue in immigration is ac- companied “by a deep sense of loss of self-identity and of internal objects” (1991, p. 620). Marcos, Eisma, and Guimon (1977) described bilingual patients who, dur- ing therapy, reported the experience of a “language-specific sense of self,” as if two persons existed, each operating in a separate language with its own value system, conflicts, and defense mechanisms. Stern (1986) described immigrants who felt they were betraying their mother tongue by having to shift to a new language. Of- ten, they were unable to describe their emotions and the world they had lost, feel- ing that the new language failed to apply to the old world. Confronted with a new, unintelligible language, immigrants may feel excluded, as a child who does not un- derstand the parents’ secret language (Grinberg & Grinberg, 1989), a feeling likely to elicit alienation, anger, or frustration. The dramatic implications entailed by a language shift may even be inferred from the “mother tongue” concept found in many languages (see also Akhtar, 1995; Amati-Mehler, Argentieri, & Canestri, 1990/1993; Fishman, 1997; Koplow & Messinger, 1990).

Studies exploring the main impact of immigration on family life indicate that certain aspects, such as identity conflicts, alienation, and intergenerational dis-

230 TANNENBAUM

cord, are uniquely magnified in the immigration process (Akhtar, 1995; Hong & Domokos-Cheng Ham, 1992; Ritsner & Ponizovsky, 1999). Children may also be faced with a conflict of loyalties, when their parents simultaneously expect them to acculturate and succeed while retaining their sense of tradition and family values (Gudykunst & Lee, 2001; Roer-Strier, 2000). In shifting to a new language, the younger generation may often be cut off from its roots, possibly leading to es- trangement between family members. Parents may feel unqualified to teach their children all the things parents usually teach, in transmitting to their children the cultural values and beliefs that the family and the group hold dear, and in support- ing the development of a strong sense of self or culture in their children (Koplow & Messinger, 1990; Wong-Fillmore, 1991). Gudykunst and Lee (2001), who focused on family communication in the context of ethnic and cultural identities, suggested that the greater the difference between parents and children in the emphasis they place on these identities, and the greater the gap between individuals and their fam- ilies, the greater the intergenerational conflict as well as the speech divergence when they communicate.

ATTACHMENT RELATIONS

Beyond their specific features, immigrant families share in the dynamics common to families in general. Attachment theory, which describes one dimension of these dynamics, is one of the most widely researched and applied theories of emotional development across cultures and circumstances. First developed by Bowlby (1969, 1973), this theory conceptualizes the tendency of human beings to form strong af- fectionate bonds with particular others, and also outlines diverse forms of emo- tional distress and personality disturbance. According to attachment theory, the in- fant, and later the toddler, develops internal working models of “self” and of “other” derived from the experience of the infant’s relationships with the care- givers. Two major types of attachment patterns may develop on the basis of these working models: secure and insecure (the latter including avoidant, ambivalent, and disorganized modes of attachment). Individuals tend to interpret their experi- ences in a manner consistent with their existing internal working models, con- stantly tending to confirm these models throughout their lives (Ainsworth, 1990; Bowlby, 1969, 1973). Continuity in attachment modes is therefore expected throughout the life cycle (e.g., Klohnen & Bera, 1998; Meyers, 1998).1Although a

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 231

1The focus on attachment theory is not incidental. The secure base phenomenon has been empha- sized by many other theorists, such as Erikson (1950), who coined the notion of “basic trust,” or Sandler (1985), who spoke of “background of safety.” Many psychoanalysts argue that the infant–caregiver re- lationship is grounded in the need for a relationship rather than on physical necessities (Fonagy, 1999). Both attachment theorists and several psychoanalysts see maternal (or other caregiver’s) sensitivity as a key issue in determining the quality of relationship regulation between mother and infant, as well as that of later relationships (Bowlby, 1969; Erikson, 1950; Winnicott, 1965).

range of emotional reactions or gestures may indeed have different connotations in different cultures (Rothbaum, Weixz, Pott, Miyake, & Morelli, 2000), and al- though it is not assumed that family communication patterns are identical within or across ethnic groups (e.g., Gudykunst & Lee, 2001), research indicates that chil- dren, across cultures, become attached to their primary caregivers and basically display a similar range of behaviors in stress or comfort-seeking situations (e.g., Harwood, Miller, & Irizarry, 1995; Van IJzendoorn & Sagi, 1999).

Attachment relations may be assessed or categorized in several ways, depend- ing on the purpose of the assessment and on the age of the participants. Thus, the Strange Situation Technique (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978) is usually applied when assessing attachment modes in infants; the Attachment Q-Sets is used with toddlers (Waters & Deane, 1985); the Separation Anxiety Test is used during latency and adolescence (Slough & Greenberg, 1990; Tannenbaum & Howie, 2002); and the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI; George, Kaplan, & Main, 1985) is used among adults.

An interesting concept related to attachment relationships is the “reflective self” (Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 1991; Fonagy, Steele, Steele, Moran, & Higgitt, 1991). Fonagy, Steele, and Steele (1991) associated the coherence with which adults re- member their childhood, or their ability to talk about their past experiences in the AAI, and their level of insight. Insight is affected by their early (attachment) rela- tions with their parents, and in turn, affects their level of understanding and respon- siveness to their own child. This link may be understood as emerging from an inter- nal sense of coherence, structured at early stages of development in response to parental sensitivity to the infant’s mental world. The parents’ability “to observe their own mental functioning, to have a plausible view of themselves and their objects as human being, thinking, feeling, wishing, believing, wanting, and desiring” (Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 1991, p. 215), is thus considered to have direct implications for the parents’ relationship with their infant. Insight, then, is related to early secure rela- tionships, as well as to secure relationships with one’s own children.

These clinical examples, literary insights, and theoretical assumptions, suggest that immigrants often view their mother tongue as a symbol of their past, their fam- ily of origin, childhood landscapes, familial myths, and early memories. As such, language maintenance or language shift may reflect complex emotional processes both at the individual and at the familial levels, and even at the level of the group.

This study aims to enrich our understanding of the internal world of immigrants regarding their linguistic experiences, and to explore the potential range of associ- ations that language may hold for different people. For this purpose, I adopted a qualitative method that enables one to generate hypotheses to explain various phe- nomena by relying on the participants’ interpretations of their own reality (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Smith, 1997). Qualitative research begins from a specific stance that helps researchers thematize their data and focus on essentials in light of a spe- cific conceptual framework. A conceptual frame of reference may be useful in sys-

232 TANNENBAUM

temizing hypotheses generation and data collection, helping to structure the quali- tative analysis (Alasuutari, 1995; Hayes, 1997).

The basic conceptual assumption in this study is that language is associated with emotions, and therefore, language shift or language maintenance may be as- sociated with psychological aspects—how, to what extent, and in what directions are some of the questions the study asks. In other words, the narrative accounts were not used to test a preexistent, fully formed theory; instead, they were used as a basis for developing one, allowing for the discovery of new and unpredictable as- pects (similar to Smith, 1997).

These issues have also been the subject of quantitative studies, as reported else- where (Guardado, 2002; Tannenbaum & Howie, 2002). Yet, qualitative research methods were viewed as better suited for exploring the personal, subjective interpre- tations of reality at the focus of this study. As Alasuutari (1995) emphasized, the goal of qualitative research should not necessarily be to produce practical information about society but rather to create a body of critical literature that may contribute a new perspective to the investigation of social or psychological phenomena.

METHOD

Participants

The study relied on the analysis of case studies (Creswell, 1998; Smith, 1997). Seven immigrant families living in Sydney, Australia, were interviewed using a semi-structured interview. The families had lived in Sydney for up to 15 years, and, in all of them, both parents shared the same mother tongue, which was not English. All the parents were fluent in English, so that speaking to their children in their mother tongue was a matter of choice rather than necessity.2 All parents were in their late 30s and early 40s, middle class, educated, and professional. Table 1 pres- ents the main characteristics of the participant families.

Procedure

Interviews lasted around 2 hr with each family, in two sessions. Questions were de- liberately phrased openly and were mainly intended as cues for the participants with minimum constraint or comments by the interviewer (e.g., Denzin & Lincoln,

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 233

2Participants’ names were changed to protect anonymity. All interviews were conducted in English except for two interviews with Israeli families, conducted in Hebrew. It could be argued that, to maxi- mize comparability, it would have been advisable to conduct all interviews in English. Given that He- brew is the researcher’s mother tongue, however, it was decided that any methodological advantages that might accrue from speaking English with Hebrew-speaking participants would be outweighed by the artificiality of failing to use a common language.

1994). Each interview started with a general, open statement: “Please tell me about your immigration experience. I am especially interested in hearing how you deal with language issues.” From then on, the interview’s pace and content were dic- tated mainly by the participants. If the participants failed to mention specific issues altogether, however, direct questions were inserted to ensure that all participants did address the central concerns of this study, such as the following:

• What language(s) do you speak at home—between yourselves, with your children, with your extended family? What language(s) do your children speak with you? Why do you think this is so?

• What are your emotional associations with your mother tongue? • Can you tell me about significant incidents of your children using your

mother tongue rather than English? • Can you think of any childhood experiences that, more than others, affected

your decision to immigrate? Can you think of special incidents in your own childhood that affected your later linguistic choices?

• How would you describe your current relationship with your children? • Do you think language maintenance has any relevance to family relations?

The interviews were conducted with both parents together, although in some cases, the children were around for parts of the interview. Overall, children were

234 TANNENBAUM

TABLE 1 Main Characteristics of the Interviewed Families

The Parents Country of Origin

Parents’ Mother Tongue

Children’s Ages and Gender

Years in Australia

Language Maintenance?

Thomas and Koni Germany German 10 (m), 8 (f)

7 Y

Sasha and Lina Russia Russian 12 (m), 9 (m)

15 N

Yoav and Nurit Israel Hebrew 12 (f), 9 (f), 5 (m)

6 Y

Jose and Sofia Mexico Spanish 8 (m) 11/14 N

Oded and Tamar Israel Hebrew 8 (f), 5(m), 3 (f)

12 Y

Mario and Rosa Argentina Spanish 8 (f), 4 (f) 3 Y

Roberto and Julietta Italy Italian 7 (f), 5 (m) 2 Y, N

Note. (m) = male; (f) = female; Y = yes; N = no.

not active participants in terms of content related to interview issues, although when possible, notes were added in regard to parent–children interactions, explicit input of children, actual language use, and overt emotions.

With the family’s permission, interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were read and reared several times to classify themes emerging as cen- tral. These themes were then allocated to several categories including language, emotions, family relations, childhood history, and the immigration experience. The purpose was to identify recurring patterns across cases with the aim of identi- fying associations between language issues and familial-emotional ones.

TALES FROM THE SUITCASE:3 IMMIGRANT FAMILIES TALK ABOUT LANGUAGE, IMMIGRATION, AND BEYOND

Thomas and Koni

The family came from Germany due to Thomas’s work, and has been living in Australia for 7 years. Thomas and Koni have two children: a 10-year-old boy and an 8-year-old girl.

Koni remembers her own childhood as a succession of conflicts with her mother, whom she describes as a highly respected woman “with lots of friends and admirers” and the central figure of the extended family. Her basic feelings as a child were of being useless and unappreciated by her mother, always the “black sheep” of the family. She was considered the most rebellious child, “the one who always got into trouble.” She was the most problematic of her siblings at school, suffered from attention difficulties, and never received more than average grades. She describes her father as weak and living always in her mother’s shade, although “with a golden heart.” Her mother had dominated the household, even to the extent of detaching her husband from his family of origin. She remembers hearing her fa- ther, on many nights, criticizing her mother about her interaction with Koni, saying she was too tough with her and should not argue with her constantly. She describes herself as always much closer to her father than to her mother, who was “some- times a real stranger…Worse than that—as if she wanted me to fail.”

Thomas comes from a middle-class family with one older sister. He was rather laconic in his descriptions, appearing much more reserved and distant than Koni, but the overall impression was that of stable and close relationships within his fam- ily. He reported that they talked regularly on the phone, his parents had recently visited and stayed with them for several weeks, and both mentioned that Koni also has a good relationship with his parents, who somehow function as “substitute par- ents,” as Thomas commented.

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 235

3The idea for this title came from an Australian television program dealing with immigrant families.

Thomas and Koni met in high school and have been together since. They always thought of living far from the family, in another city or in the countryside. When an opportunity for work in Australia came up, they decided to give it a try. They live in a remote suburb of Sydney, in a big house surrounded by a large wooded area.

They talk about their children with great affection. Koni is highly involved with their school activities and often volunteers to assist in various events. She enthusi- astically describes the last family trip, when they went camping for a week with several other families. Thomas also speaks quite a lot about the children, relating many details about their school, friends, and hobbies.

Although they both explicitly claim it is good for their well-being (especially Koni’s) to be far from Koni’s family, they both feel closely attached to their coun- try and culture. The house is full of German books and music (for children too), they have many German friends, and they keep in touch with friends in Germany. They consciously relate to the issue of language. Both state that being able to relate to their children in their mother tongue is extremely important, and at home they speak German almost exclusively. As Koni says

the fact that my own mother was bad to me does not stain the whole of German cul- ture…I need to make it better for my own children, but there is no way I could have done it in another language…I want them to be part of my world for good and bad, and I cannot see any way to do it in English.

Both also added that this enables them to relate more directly and more easily to their children, who are able to communicate with the extended family in Germany, and it feels more natural for Koni and Thomas to hear German at home. As Koni says, “sometimes this English is like a mask she [her daughter] puts on…It’s like a different person.”

Sasha and Lina

Sasha and Lina came to Australia separately from the former USSR, 15 years be- fore the interview. They met at a university, married, and had two boys, now 12 and 9. Both stated they had come to Australia mainly hoping to live a different, free, and apolitical life. Lina added that living in an undemocratic society had always been hard for her. Lacking access to knowledge and to what happens in the world, with information always being censored, “not having freedom of speech, of cre- ation, even of thought,” were aspects of life she had always detested. “Also, the in- doctrination dripping on you wherever you are, especially at school…I didn’t want to raise my children that way.” They both added that, economically, life in Austra- lia was very different. “Not that we are rich here,” said Sasha, “but at least you have your own space for yourself…there you often have to live with some other families in the same small flat.”

236 TANNENBAUM

Although they often spoke English when other friends were around, when by themselves, they spoke mainly Russian. When their first child began speaking, his first language was Russian. On this issue, they note the following:

we decided to start speaking more English with each other and with the boy, in order for him to be an “Australian.” After all, we came here to live a different kind of life…and hearing our baby speaking Russian seemed wrong at the time.

After several months, their son gradually shifted to English and today, their com- munication with him and with their second son is basically in English.

When the focus of the interview shifted to the emotional implications of this use of language for their relationships with the boys and with each other, Lina nodded, as if this issue was easy for her to address. She said that, after her father’s death several years earlier, she had started therapy, seeking to understand their relation- ship better. The experience had, in turn, helped her understand her deeper reasons for leaving Russia and become aware of other layers in her personality: “It’s not just politics that brought me here.” She said that her relationships with her own family in Russia had never been really close, although no one had ever admitted this, and it was easier for her parents, as well as for herself, to deal with her immi- gration as a move toward a freer or easier place rather than acknowledge any diffi- culties within the family:

I realized that I had hoped to have a completely different life, a different family. I didn’t want to raise my boys like my parents had raised me…I was never very close to my brother and sister, and never knew much about my parents’ own life. They did not tell me much about themselves, about their problems, about their own childhood. We were just living together from day to day, but actually did not know much about each other.

Lina added that Sasha’s family is also problematic, and although he did not deny Lina’s notions about his family, it was more difficult for him to elaborate in detail. In the context of their relationships with their families, however, both said it was probably no accident they now speak mainly English between themselves as well as with their sons, “as if speaking this other language helps to make a different kind of family. You know, I even used to sing lullabies in English to the boys,” said Lina. Most of their friends are not Russians, and Russian culture plays a limited role in their present life.

On rare occasions, they find themselves telling the boys stories about their own childhood. Both, however, say they find it more and more difficult to do this, be- cause the boys do not seem interested or keen on drawing close to their world. As Sasha says, “they don’t ask us much about ourselves anyway,” to which Lina added, “I guess I can say that this trick [i.e., shifting to English] didn’t really work.

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 237

I tried to do it differently, but I often find myself very frustrated in my relationship with them.”

Yoav and Nurit

The family arrived from Israel due to Yoav’s job, and have been in Australia 6 years, although they had never intended staying this long. Yoav works full time and travels a lot, whereas Nurit works casually and spends most of her time at home and with the children. They have two girls, ages 12 and 8, and a boy of 5.

Nurit’s parents are Holocaust survivors. After the war, they emigrated to Israel and settled in a kibbutz, where Nurit was born and lived until she came to Austra- lia. She describes her childhood as generally happy, with the inevitable ups and downs. One experience she elaborated on was “communal sleeping.”4 Nurit has some bad childhood memories related to this arrangement, such as crying, or being very scared, without her parents around to comfort her. As an adolescent, she re- calls often feeling confused, embarrassed, and without anyone close. She con- trasted her experience with that of her eldest daughter (and gave the example of them going together to buy her first bra), and said she could not imagine herself raising her own children like that.

Yoav was born in Poland. His father died when he was very young and he went with his mother to Brazil to join the rest of the family, but they did not adjust and went to Israel. Yoav’s mother remarried and was unable (or unwilling) to keep him with her and sent him to a kibbutz,5 where he met Nurit.

Coming to Australia was their first trip overseas and their first time living out- side the kibbutz. They arrived with two daughters, and their son was born a year later. The parents speak mainly Hebrew, between themselves and with their chil- dren. The girls usually answer in English although they understand Hebrew well, and, if asked to do so, can answer in Hebrew. The boy has a speech problem and does not speak much, but when he does speak to his parents, it is mainly in Hebrew. Both parents said that, naturally, they sometimes speak English with the children and especially when other children are present, but do not really like this. Nurit de- scribed feeling somewhat awkward in doing so and added that, when she hears the

238 TANNENBAUM

4In this arrangement, children from as early as a few months have their own “house,” according to their age, and a metapelet (caregiver) is in charge of most daily routines in each house. They spend ev- ery afternoon and evening with the parents, who also put them to bed in the children’s “house,” and do not sleep in the same house with their parents. This arrangement, prevalent until about two decades ago and when Nurit was growing up, has now been abandoned.

5For many years, kibbutzim hosted children who, for various reasons—broken families, financial problems, temporary crises—could not stay with their parents. These children are known as yaldei huts (children from outside). They live with the kibbutz children and participate in their activities. Each of them is given an “adopting” family in the kibbutz, and they usually visit their own families in the city every few weeks.

children speak English, especially at school assemblies or performances, she re- ally misses Israel. “I feel almost sad; imagining them on a stage at a school in Is- rael, singing in Hebrew, singing the songs I used to sing as a child.”

Relationships between family members, especially between Nurit and the chil- dren, are very close. She is involved in their daily routines and with their friends, speaking about them in great detail and with much affection. When talking about the girls, she described their activities as well as each one’s strengths and weak- nesses. Her relationship with her son, however, resembles more a relationship with a baby than that with a 5-year old child. She speaks to him in “motherly” tones, in a higher pitched and very gentle voice. She describes some of his unusual behavior patterns (marked delay in speech performance, clinging, unsociable) in very ac- cepting terms, in marked contrast with the way she describes her daughters and their difficulties.

Yoav is very kind to the children. Although he is often overseas, he emphasized that he calls them every night to say goodnight, he always brings back presents, and, when he is home, he insists on doing things together. Both parents said that Nurit is much more involved with the children due to Yoav’s frequent absences, and she is by no means the dominant parent in terms of their daily life.

Jose and Sofia

Jose and Sofia came from Mexico separately and have an 8-year-old son. Jose de- scribes his own childhood as “interesting.” In his early childhood, his father was rarely home due to work commitments. His parents divorced when he was 9, ap- parently because his mother had an affair with someone she eventually married. He spent time with both his parents but said the following: “Although I practically had two homes, I actually felt as having none.” He cannot recall what it was like going through this as a child, but does mention self-pity and some “anger toward my mum…like how could she leave us” [him and his father]. He describes his father with pity and empathy. Although his father had several relationships after the di- vorce, he never remarried and had been dead for 10 years at the time of the inter- view. His mother still lives in Mexico with her second husband.

Jose left Mexico in his early 20s, traveled around the world, and worked casu- ally in many places. He eventually arrived in Australia, where he met Sofia. They married and decided to stay in Australia. Jose says it was “a feeling of a cleaner place” for him.

Sofia arrived in Australia after finishing high school, with her parents and two younger sisters. Her family decided to emigrate to Australia because they felt it would be a safer place to live. Before their immigration, they had often lived through “hard times” in Mexico. She described the hardships of threats and fears because they were relatively wealthy in a poor country, so when her father was of- fered a job in Australia, the family left Mexico. Soon after they arrived, she en-

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 239

rolled in a university course. She describes her relationships with other family members as good, especially with her mother. Her father was always quite distant, highly involved with his work and often arriving home when she and her sisters were already asleep. She respects him, but is not very close to him.

She met Jose about 9 years ago via mutual friends, not Mexicans. Because their relationship started in a non-Mexican context, they began by speaking English to each other. Also, because both had lived for a relatively long time “in English,” they found it easy and even natural to speak English with each other, and currently speak English almost exclusively. Although they have not maintained their lan- guage, both Jose and Sofia often praise various aspects of their culture and their country of origin (even their son commented on it by saying, somewhat ironically, “everything Mexican is better”).

When their son was born, it was natural for them to relate to him in English. His knowledge of Spanish is thus very limited (all his extended family members on both sides speak English, and this is not crucial for his communication with them). Jose repeated several times that he and his son are very close, spend much time to- gether, and share many activities—fishing, bush walking, cooking, and many intel- lectual pursuits, some connected with school and some simply as a common inter- est. His work from home allows Jose to be with his son more than Sofia, who works long hours. Throughout the interview, Jose stressed his unusually intimate rela- tionship with his son, almost as if boasting about it.

Oded and Tamar

Oded and Tamar left Israel 12 years ago, soon after their marriage. Officially, they came because of Oded’s studies, which he eventually abandoned to become self-employed. They have three children, two girls ages 8 and 3 and a 5-year-old boy. Oded was born in a kibbutz, where he lived until his early 20s. His older brother was killed in war 20 years before, and soon after, his father died of what Oded describes as “a broken heart.” He has a “complicated” relationship with his only sister and a problematic relationship with his mother, who still lives in the kib- butz. He has not seen her for more than 6 years and admits he tries to avoid even phone conversations with her, which “tend to produce new reasons to fight about.” He describes her as “very remote, even arrogant,” and claims that because of the family’s tragedy, she became even less accessible: “She is in her own world, which she surrounded with walls to protect her, and it is very hard, sometimes impossible to get in. Even the grandchildren do not have much success.”

Tamar describes her own family as “very normal.” She has one brother, and re- ports good relationships with both her parents. Back in Israel, before her marriage, she held a highly prestigious position and this is why, she claims, her first few years in Australia were extremely hard. She describes the loneliness, the need to start from the beginning and prove herself, and the adaptation to different conditions:

240 TANNENBAUM

“even to drive here took me two years.” Now, however, she claims to be satisfied. She is happy with her job, the children are doing well at school and socially, and their financial situation is stable. She seems strong-willed and the one who sets the rules in the house, as evident, for instance, on the issue of whether to stay in Aus- tralia or go back to Israel. Oded would have gone back “yesterday,” as he says (“What do I have here? Bricks?”). Tamar misses her family and friends, but feels that Australia provides a much safer environment to bring up children and they should stay.

Israeli culture dominates the house. There are pictures of Israel, many history and tourist books about Israel, almost all the music in the house is in Hebrew, the children attend a private Jewish school (and preschool), and most of their friends are Israeli. The parents speak only Hebrew with each other as well as with the chil- dren. The children tend to respond in English although all speak Hebrew, and the parents say they understand everything.

The most interesting incident the parents described in this context was a recent fight with their eldest daughter. Throughout the argument, the girl shifted from English to Hebrew in a sort of frustrated manner, “as if really trying to express her- self.” Oded also speaks of sensing something artificial when the children speak English, especially the older girl, “almost as if she is using it to distance her- self…as if she is a different person in English than in Hebrew.” Similarly, on his own language use, he comments as follows: “only in Hebrew can I really love them, or really yell at them; in English it’s like a game.”

Mario and Rosa

Mario and Rosa arrived from Argentina, and have lived in Australia for 3 years. They have two girls, ages 8 and 4. Rosa’s family followed them to Australia, and she describes her relationships with her parents as very close. She also has a brother in Australia, who is mentally ill.

Both Mario and Rosa describe Mario’s parents as very intrusive and patroniz- ing. They had many critical comments on how Mario and Rosa are raising their girls, and did not support them financially when they needed it although they them- selves were quite wealthy. At the same time, Mario describes his relationships with them as rather distant. As Rosa puts it, “at least if they were kind, we could have lived with those comments, but they were intrusive and distant at the same time.” Rosa, more than Mario, experienced their intrusion as unbearable. Going overseas seemed to her to offer a good opportunity to live their own life in a more peaceful environment. Mario’s main motivation to settle in Australia was to improve their financial situation.

Speaking Spanish with each other and with the girls comes naturally to them, although they use more English in some contexts—when doing homework, some- times when playing with the girls, and when other people are around. The parents

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 241

read the children stories in Spanish (but sometimes also in English), listen to Span- ish music, and watch videos sent to them from Argentina. Having Rosa’s family around increases the Spanish input dramatically, and the girls’ motivation to speak the language is quite strong.

They are very close to their daughters and involved in the children’s daily rou- tines, and both emphasized the importance of being together as much as possible. They particularly stressed their wish that the girls would maintain close relation- ships between them, because both had experienced problematic and distant rela- tionships with their siblings.

During the interview, the older girl addressed her sister in Spanish. When I later asked the parents about it, they said that the girls did tend to speak Spanish with each other more often than they do with them, especially the older girl when she speaks to her younger sister.

Although Rosa clearly stated that she had wanted to distance herself from Mario’s family and from other bad aspects of Argentina that she associates with them, it never occurred to her to change her language. She feels very attached to her language and her home country. She says that when they recently returned from a visit, she found it hard to recover from a painful and relentless feeling she had lost something she would never be able to regain in Australia. The visit had also dramatically strengthened the girls’ use of Spanish for a long time afterward, and she found that this was “really nice…something more familiar.”

Roberto and Julietta

The family came from Italy 2 years ago. Roberto works in an Italian company, with which he made contact before arriving, and Julietta works in a bank. They have two children, a girl of 7 and a boy of 5. Both children attend a Catholic school. Roberto’s family had moved a great deal during his childhood, living in several Eu- ropean countries. He was then sent to a boarding school in Australia, because his father had worked in Australia in his early 20s and was an Australian citizen. After finishing high school, Roberto returned to Italy and lived there for several years. He says he had always wanted to try and live in Australia with his own family. Julietta comes from a rather devout Catholic family with right-wing leanings (“my father thinks Mussolini contributed a lot to the country…built roads, bridges”). Her parents were divorced when she was young, and she has a much closer rela- tionship with her father than with her mother, whom she describes as distant and not really involved with her life.

Their daughter was very friendly and pleasant at the beginning of the interview, although something was slightly unusual in her overall behavior. After the daugh- ter had left the room, Julietta reported that the girl had been sexually abused by her uncle several months before their arrival in Australia, during a weekend when they had left the children with Roberto’s parents and his younger brother. The story sur-

242 TANNENBAUM

faced only after several weeks. In addition to the shocking episode, Julietta was fu- rious with the denial and the silence that had characterized the family’s reaction to the incident. Whereas before the incident she had been slightly reluctant to come to Australia, she reports that after the event, she could no longer stand living close to Roberto’s family.

Their son has many behavior problems, especially at school, which the parents attribute mainly to the recent immigration, including the language change. His English is rather awkward, and Julietta thinks that the very notion of having two different words for the same object is still alien to him, causing him some acquisi- tion difficulties. In contrast, although the parents speak only Italian at home, the girl picked up English with a striking Australian accent within a few months and clings to it, speaking Italian very rarely. Roberto seems keen on the idea that his children would be bilingual, enjoying the advantages of speaking English, and re- taining the ability to communicate in Italian with their family in Italy.

The parents appear attentive to the children, and it is evident they both hope to create something better for them in the new environment, although they do not seem to know how to obtain help for them. Julietta says she sometimes felt incom- petent, “maybe because of my own mum, who was never really present for me.” But the atmosphere at home is generally warm and affectionate, and all are much involved with each other’s descriptions of their past and present experiences (in- cluding the children, when present).

CENTRAL THEMES EMERGING FROM THE CASE STUDIES

Language issues appeared to be consistently associated with a wide spectrum of emotional responses and personal connotations. Parents contributed examples as- sociating language with issues of identity, with their childhood experiences, and their relationships with their children.

One characteristic common to all narratives deserves mention: in all the fami- lies, at least one parent had undergone a markedly painful experience (or experi- ences) in the home country, during childhood or later in life. For instance, Koni felt she was the black sheep of her family throughout her whole childhood; Lina expe- rienced cold and distant relationships with her family of origin; Yoav had lost his father at an early age, and was sent away by his mother; Jose grew up in the shadow of his parents’ divorce, feeling he had been betrayed by his mother; Oded lost both his brother and father within a short time at a relatively young age; Mario reported having complicated relationships with his parents; and the daughter of Roberto and Julietta was sexually abused by her uncle.

The relatively large number of such stories in this study may be connected to their shared feature as immigration narratives. A highly appealing job opportunity

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 243

or the option of quality of life improvements are often good reasons to leave the home country. Leaving one’s family, friends, and language, however, is not an act that everyone is capable of or willing to perform. All the interviewed families seemed to have had positive reasons to go to Australia but also reasons to leave some memories behind.

Although these painful memories or experiences cannot, in and of themselves, explain each family’s language choice, their attitude to their mother tongue or their family relations, they may have affected behavioral choices. In some cases, these experiences led to a desire to do something entirely different from whatever had characterized their childhood, including using the new language. In other cases, family members clung to their mother tongue as an emotional crutch, as if saying, “despite what happened to me, this is still part of my life. I should not suffer even more by losing this part of me.” The following sections outline the main categories that emerged from the narratives of the interviewed families.

Language Maintenance As a Tool for Creating Family Cohesion

Relating the use of one’s mother tongue (L1) to closer, more spontaneous, and more relaxed relationships with their own children was a recurring theme among parents who insisted on L1 maintenance.6 Parents who maintained their mother tongue when communicating with their children reported more flowing and spon- taneous relationships. Often, they explicitly associated such relationships with lan- guage use (see comments of Koni, Nurit, or Oded regarding the relations between being natural and using L1). Feeling more “genuine” when using L1 may be perti- nent not only to the parents. Oded and Tamar’s daughter shifted from English to Hebrew during a highly charged fight with them, a code-switching that they under- stood as reflecting her own association between the mother tongue and a more emotional and authentic communication mode. Similarly, Yoav and Nurit’s youn- ger son, who speaks more Hebrew than his older sisters, has a closer and more inti- mate relationship with his mother than do the girls. The elder daughter of Mario and Rosa quite often speaks in Spanish to her younger sister, which appears to be part of a general “mothering” behavior toward her. Doing so, she naturally follows her mother, apparently including her language behavior (Taft & Cahill, 1989, re- ported a similar finding among immigrant Lebanese families).

Several parents reported occasionally using English as a spontaneous reaction to the child’s English speech (see also Pan, 1995), yet most of them noted that this felt artificial to them, at least to some extent. Some mentioned similar affect re-

244 TANNENBAUM

6As used in this context, “language maintenance” among the children does not necessarily denote actual active speech or linguistic fluency, but merely an ability for basic communication in the lan- guage, or at least the ability to understand the parents when they use the language.

garding the child’s use of English (see Koni’s or Oded’s statements regarding this issue). Most parents recalled using L1 more often in situations where the child is more vulnerable, in family interactions, and in intimate communication, consistent with findings from other studies that emphasize domain-separation among immi- grants (e.g., De Vries, 1993; Taft & Cahill, 1989; Tannenbaum, 2003).

Language Shift As a Tool for Establishing Emotional Distance

Several narratives reflected a tendency of parents or children to shift to second lan- guage (L2), thereby erecting, whether consciously or unconsciously, a kind of fence or barrier between their past and their present. The most apparent example was that of Lina, an instance of a conscious decision not to maintain the mother tongue. It is a story of language loss at the cost of losing intimacy with her children, and to some extent with herself. Sasha and Lina invested a great deal of energy in trying to erase their past: they tend not to talk much about it, most of their friends are not Russian, and they maintain loose contact with their relatives still in Russia. Speaking English rather than Russian is crucial to this endeavor. The paradox, however, as they themselves have indicated, is that their desire to create something completely different from their own childhood experience was mainly focused on the hope of establishing closer family relations, unlike those of their own child- hood. Yet, they both sometimes feel that, precisely because of their detachment from their own childhood experiences, they have created the same problem only in a different manner (or in a different language). Their failure to use their mother tongue with their children may be one aspect of the tendency to detach themselves from their own past and both feel that, to some extent, it is alienating them from their sons. The fact that their sons are not, and never were, particularly interested in stories about the parents’ childhood may be just one implication of the discontinu- ity they themselves have created between the present and the past. In other words, besides widely reported findings indicating that parental or family communication patterns affect children’s social skills, areas of interest, and to some extent person- ality characteristics (e.g., Li-Ning, 1999; McLeod & Chaffee, 1972), it is sug- gested here that the parents’ openness concerning their own life experiences and the accessibility of these past memories has a dramatic impact on children’s coping styles and on family dynamics in general.

Another relevant narrative is that of Jose, which revolves around the issue of childhood betrayal. Jose’s use of English could be a statement of independence, of creating his own realm (e.g., Amati-Mehler et al., 1990/1993; Mirsky, 1991), and might even be interpreted as a vindictive act against his mother, as if using a new language is a kind of betrayal, this time on his part. As emphasized by Stern (1986), language maintenance is often associated with loyalty to parents. In this case, loyalty was not part of the game.

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 245

One more example is that of Roberto and Julietta’s daughter, who acquired flu- ent English very quickly. The girls’ rapid acquisition may reflect her strong need to have a new domain for herself, away from the trauma she underwent in her home country and in her mother tongue. Her parents had not been there to protect her when she had needed them, which may have undermined her loyalty to them and to their language. Using the new language may help her to distance herself from her family, and as such, serve as some sort of defense mechanism.

From a different perspective, it is interesting to note that some parents indicated shifting to English when scolding the child in mild incidents, as if to intentionally distance themselves from the scene and help themselves stay relatively calm and controlled (see also Heller, 1988). Many made an analogy to the ease with which they can use “obscene” words in English, as opposed to their embarrassment when using the same words in their mother tongue (see also Amati-Mehler et al., 1990/1993; Grinberg & Grinberg, 1989; Stengel, 1939).

Language Maintenance, Attachment Relations, and Coping Mechanisms

Attachment relations were not investigated directly during the interviews in terms of using standardized measures to assess it, but served as a central lens from which to understand and analyze the narratives. Furthermore, because the interviews ad- dressed parental childhood memories and their internal emotional world, some as- pects of the interviews can be related, to a degree, to categories derived from the AAI.7 From the stories, and even more so from the way the stories were told and from the details they provided, some hypotheses were derived concerning attach- ment history and the current working models of the parents that were interviewed.

The main characteristic of secure attachment relationships, as expressed in the AAI (categorized as free/autonomous), is the ability to elaborate on child- hood experiences in a coherent, detailed manner, being able to relate to positive and negative experiences, and give relevant and detailed illustrations. An autono- mous adult will believably describe one or both parents as loving during child- hood, or be reflective, largely free of idealization and angry preoccupation. In contrast, avoidant adults (dismissing) are characterized in the AAI by having few memories of early experiences and a tendency to dismiss the emotional sig- nificance of such memories8 (e.g., Appelman, 2000; Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 1991; George et al., 1985).

246 TANNENBAUM

7At no point in the interview was there any attempt to conduct an interview such as the Adult At- tachment Interview (AAI), because formal training is required for this. Rather, retrospectively, some is- sues that emerged from these case studies suggested an interesting association between the present data and the AAI as a frame of reference.

8The Adult Attachment Interview also relates to ambivalent and disorganized categories of attach- ment, as revealed in adults, which did not appear relevant to this study.

In this study, although most of the parents reported relatively painful experi- ences related to their family of origin, parents who maintained their language elab- orated on these memories in greater detail, viewed them as significant to their pres- ent, and related them more often to their present language behavior than those who had not maintained their language. The parents’ ability to elaborate their past expe- riences coherently, which is often regarded in the AAI as reflecting secure attach- ment relations, seems to differentiate between language “maintainers” and “non-maintainers.” This ability or tendency appears to be more relevant to lan- guage maintenance than the experiences described. No claim of causal relation be- tween secure attachment and language maintenance is being made here, because attachment relationships were not sufficiently explored in this study and it is im- possible to control all the variables that interact with attachment relationships. Nevertheless, the association between the coherence of memories (or level of in- sight into the significance of early experiences) and language maintenance, and the relation posited in the AAI between coherence and secure relationships, is interest- ing and suggests further research. Parents who “decide” to hold on to their mother tongue despite bad experiences in the past and in their old world could be confront- ing life in a more direct manner. Their decision could denote a way of coping by maintaining a sense of continuity with the past rather than cutting it away from their life, and staying close to their memories rather than focusing on the present and the future. This coping mechanism could be related to a trait of directness and openness in general, which may well contribute, in turn, to closer and more inti- mate relationships with their children (see also Koplow & Messinger, 1990). Con- versely, secure attachment relations with their children may facilitate a parental tendency to maintain their mother tongue and relate to their children from this “continuity” stance. In other words, it is suggested that attachment mode and lan- guage maintenance are in a reciprocal relationship.

For example, Koni described a very complicated relationship with her mother throughout her childhood (growing up with a persistent feeling that she was a dis- appointment to her, not as good as her siblings, and, in her mother’s eyes, unwor- thy), but reported a much closer and supportive relationship with her father. She told her story openly, related it to her personal history, added rich details as “proof,” and altogether presented a coherent narrative (see also Appelman, 2000). At the same time, Koni maintains her language and culture consciously and enthu- siastically. She is also close to her children and keeps them close to her past in both its positive and negative aspects.

The narratives of Yoav and Nurit, Oded and Tamar, or Mario and Rosa, fol- lowed a similar pattern concerning the wealth of their memories, although their contents involved complicated relationships with at least one of their family mem- bers. Language and ethnic cultures are maintained in several ways in all these fam- ilies through activities deliberately arranged to preserve ties with the past, with the home country, with the extended families even when relationships are precarious,

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 247

and through conscious acts designed to keep the children aware of these rich as- pects of their past.

Conversely, parents who were not maintaining their language were either much less capable of elaborating on their past experiences, or lacked insight into the pos- sible psychological influence of early experiences on their current emotional state of mind. For instance, Jose described several childhood experiences but in rather intellectual terms, with minimal emotional involvement and suggesting no inter- pretations or possible consequences. Lina stressed that her insights were very new, and until a few years ago, she had denied her childhood difficulties and had not as- sociated the psychological reality in her family to her language maintenance pat- tern. By the time she had shifted to English with her sons, she was in a very differ- ent state of mind. In terms of language maintenance with her children, this association, as she suggested, had perhaps emerged too late.

SUMMING UP

The association between language maintenance and any other specific variable is not linear, and it could never be, given its complexity. In this article, an attempt was made to identify a common cluster from the varied narratives, without missing or distorting the significant particularistic features of these families.

The central themes that emerged from the narratives suggest that, whatever the pattern of language maintenance, decisions in this regard usually rest on a strong emotional basis. Language emerges as much more than a technical communication device. It functions as a symbol of individuals’ intimate relationships with their families in the past and in the present, with people in the home country, with the new family they build as adults, with friends, and with themselves.

The association between language maintenance and secure attachment relation- ships suggested in the previous section could be applied to both parents and chil- dren in immigrant families. Adults (or in this case, parents) with high levels of in- sight or a functional reflective self tend to be connected to their past experiences, open about them, and able to confront them (Appelman, 2000; Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 1991; Fonagy, Steele, Steele, Moran, & Higgitt, 1991; George et al., 1985; Meyers, 1998). Contributing a novel perspective to these issues, this study sug- gests that these variables are also related to mother tongue maintenance because language is associated with past memories, past and present intimacy contexts, and internal representations.

Furthermore, it is also suggested that attachment relations are associated with children’s linguistic choices, attitudes, and usage. Children were not interviewed directly in this study but this is certainly a recommended direction for follow-up research focusing on issues addressed here, by assessing linguistic patterns among immigrant children. Parents, however, did relate to their own childhood

248 TANNENBAUM

experiences as well as to those of their children in regard to linguistic behavior. On the basis of themes emerging on these aspects, of theoretical analysis of the concept of attachment relations, and continuing the link posited earlier between adult representation of attachment and adult linguistic behavior, it is suggested that children in immigrant families who are more securely attached will feel confident enough to learn a new language, but will also wish to maintain their parents’ language. The parents’ language is often the language related to the children’s internal working models in which children’s basic trust is or was con- structed. Parents frequently communicate with their children most meaningfully, spontaneously, and authentically in their mother tongue, which will thereby ac- quire meaningful connotations for securely attached children as well, influenc- ing their attitudes toward it. In contrast, insecurely attached children might find in the new language a way of constructing a space of their own (e.g., Mirsky, 1991). Strict adherence to a new language may serve as a mask or a barrier be- tween the child and the parents, which may be beneficial to the child in some cases. Amati-Mehler et al. described a similar pattern, whereby “the splitting and repression processes work through languages to build defenses that will safeguard the psychic functioning” (1990/1993, p. 184), suggesting that second language use, especially during therapy, may serve as a “safety barrier” against strong emotions and anxiety that would likely be aroused when talking about the same memories and issues using the mother tongue. This strategy seems to be the one adopted by the parents in this study who did not maintain their language. They tend to use the new language, thereby perhaps creating a new world for themselves while drawing away from their past experiences in various manners. This path was especially marked in the narratives of Lina, Jose, and Roberto and Julietta’s daughter.

The hypothesis suggested here, then, is that children who feel part of a warm and trustworthy family are more likely to succeed in their adaptation process, of which language is a crucial aspect. This dimension emerged in all the narratives of families who had maintained their language. Even parents fluent in the new lan- guage are uniquely attached to their mother tongue and tend to associate it with more authentic and intimate modes of communication. Although further research is needed to explore this notion explicitly, the material suggests that children living in close-knit families will be more motivated to enhance this closeness, and lan- guage maintenance is one of the first steps in this direction. By contrast, children who are part of more loosely attached families, where relationships between fam- ily members are rather distant, may feel “freer” to go ahead and use the new lan- guage and be less motivated to maintain the old one. Becoming competent in the new language may, in turn, facilitate the children’s sense of belonging to the new group, which may be of particular importance for children whose families do not offer them security and closeness. Once again, the story of Jose, Lina’s past deci- sions, and the daughter of Roberto and Julietta, illustrate this notion.

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 249

In sum, themes emerging from the narratives suggest that close relations be- tween family members may correspond to a tendency for family units to maintain L1 whereas L1 maintenance by children may contribute to family closeness and to positive relationships between family members. The analysis of these cases sug- gests that family relations and psychological motives are a meaningful variable rather than a minor element in language maintenance. The narratives illustrate the various levels at which language penetrates our lives, but especially the lives of adult and young immigrants. Although the influence of language is pervasive, it acquires unique characteristics for immigrant families, when what had seemed ob- vious suddenly requires attention, the flow of communication is no longer sponta- neous, and the handling of these delicate issues becomes extremely significant in these families’ daily life.

REFERENCES

Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1990). Considerations regarding theory and assessment relevant to attachments beyond infancy. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the pre- school years (pp. 463–488). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psycholog- ical study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Akhtar, S. (1995). A third individuation: Immigration, identity, and the psychoanalytic process. Jour- nal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 43, 1051–1084.

Alasuutari, P. (1995). Researching culture: Qualitative methods and cultural studies. London: Sage. Amati-Mehler, J., Argentieri, S., & Canestri, J. (1993). The Babel of the unconscious: Mother tongue

and foreign languages in the psychoanalytic dimension (J. Whitelaw-Cucco, Trans.). Madison, CT: International Universities Press. (Original work published 1990)

Appelman, E. (2000). Attachment experiences transformed into language. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 70, 192–202.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation. New York: Basic Books. Butcher, L. S. (1995). Mother tongue literacy maintenance among the children of recent Chinese immi-

grants in Brisbane. Adelaide, South Australia: Helios Art and Books. Clyne, M., & Kipp, S. (1997). Trends and changes in home language use and shift in Australia,

1986–1996. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 18, 451–473. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. De Vries, J. (1993). Ethnic language maintenance and shift. In S. S. Halli, F. Trovato, & L. Driedger

(Eds.), Ethnic demography: Canadian immigrant, racial and cultural variations (pp. 163–177). Ottowa, Ontario, Canada: Carleton University Press.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: Norton. Fishman, J. (1997). In praise of the beloved language: A comparative view of positive ethnolinguistic

consciousness. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter. Fonagy, P. (1999). Psychoanalytic theory from the viewpoint of attachment theory and research. In J.

Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 595–624). New York: Guilford.

250 TANNENBAUM

Fonagy, P., Steele, H., & Steele, M. (1991). Maternal representations of attachment during pregnancy predict the organization of infant–mother attachment at one year of age. Child Development, 62, 891–905.

Fonagy, P., Steele, M., Steele, H., Moran, G. S., & Higgitt, A. C. (1991). The capacity for understanding mental states: The reflective self in parent and child and its significance for security of attachment. Infant Mental Health, 12, 201–218.

Gay, P. (1988). Freud: A life for our time. London: J. M. Dent. George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). Attachment interview for adults. Unpublished manuscript,

University of California, Berkeley. Giles, H., Bourhis, R. Y., & Taylor, D. M. (1977). Toward a theory of language in ethnic group relation.

In H. Giles (Ed.), Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 307–348). London: Academic. Goodz, N. S. (1994). Interactions between parents and children in bilingual families. In F. Genesee

(Ed.), Educating second language children (pp. 61–81). Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univer- sity Press.

Grinberg, L., & Grinberg, R. (1989). Psychoanalytic perspectives of migration and exile. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Guardado, M. (2002). Loss and maintenance of first language skills: Case studies of Hispanic children in Vancouver. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 341–363.

Gudykunst, W. B., & Lee, C. M. (2001). An agenda for studying ethnicity and family communication. Journal of Family Communication, 1, 75–85.

Hakuta, K., & Diaz, R. (1985). The relationship between degree of bilingualism and cognitive ability: A critical discussion and some new longitudinal data. In K. E. Nelson (Ed.), Children’s language (Vol. 5, pp. 319–344). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Harwood, R. L., Miller, J. G., & Irizarry, N. L. (1995). Culture and attachment: Perceptions of the child in context. New York: Guilford.

Hayes, N. (1997). Theory-led thematic analysis: Social identification in small companies. In N. Hayes (Ed.), Doing qualitative analysis in psychology (pp. 93–114). Hove, East Sussex, England: Psychol- ogy Press.

Heller, M. (1988). Code-switching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hoffman, E. (1989). Lost in translation: A life in a new language. New York: Dutton. Hong, G. K., & Domokos-Cheng Ham, M. A. (1992). Impact of immigration on the family life cycle:

Clinical implications for Chinese Americans. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 3, 27–40. Klohnen, E. C., & Bera, S. (1998). Behavioral and experiential patterns of avoidantly and securely at-

tached women across adulthood: A 31-year longitudinal perspective. Journal of Personality and So- cial Psychology, 74, 211–223.

Koplow, L., & Messinger, E. (1990). Developmental dilemmas of young children of immigrant parents. Child and Adolescent Social Work, 7, 121–134.

Li-Ning, H. (1999). Family communication patterns and personality characteristics. Communication Quarterly, 47, 230–244.

Marcos, L. R., Eisma, J. E., & Guimon, J. (1977). Bilingualism and sense of self. The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 37, 285–290.

Masgoret, A., & Gardner, R. (1999). A causal model of Spanish immigrant adaptation in Canada. Jour- nal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20, 216–235.

McLeod, J. M., & Chaffee, S. H. (1972). The construction of social reality. In J. Tedeschi (Ed.), The so- cial influence processes (pp. 50–59). Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

Meyers, S. A. (1998). Personality correlates of adult attachment style. The Journal of Social Psychol- ogy, 138, 407–409.

Mirsky, J. (1991). Language in migration: Separation-individuation conflicts in relation to the mother tongue and the new language. Psychotherapy, 28, 618–624.

LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND FAMILY RELATIONS 251

Pan, B. A. (1995). Code negotiation in bilingual families: ‘My body starts speaking English’. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 16, 315–327.

Ritsner, M., & Ponizovsky, A. (1999). Psychological distress through immigration: The two-phase temporal pattern? International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 45, 125–139.

Roer-Strier, D. (2000). Socializing immigrant children: Home and school coping with cultural differ- ences. In E. Olshtein & G. Horenczyk (Eds.), Language, identity, and immigration (pp. 65–80). Jeru- salem: The Hebrew University Magnes Press.

Rothbaum, F., Weixz, J., Pott, M., Miyake, K., & Morelli, G. (2000). Attachment and culture; security in the United States and Japan. American Psychologist, 55, 1093–1104.

Sandler, J. (1985). Towards a reconsideration of the psychoanalytic theory of motivation. Bulletin of the Anna Freud Centre, 8, 223–243.

Slough, N. M., & Greenberg, M. T. (1990). Five-year-olds’ representations of separation from parents: Responses from the perspective of self and other. New Directions for Children, 48, 67–84.

Smith, J. A. (1997). Developing theory from case studies: Self-reconstruction and the transition to motherhood. In N. Hayes (Ed.), Doing qualitative analysis in psychology (pp. 187–199). Hove, East Sussex, England: Psychology Press.

Stengel, E. (1939). On learning a new language. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 20, 471–479. Stern, J. (1986). Mother tongue, shift of language and psychotherapy. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and

Related Sciences, 23, 195–203. Taft, R., & Cahill, D. (1989). Mother tongue maintenance in Lebanese immigrant families in Australia.

Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 10, 129–143. Tannenbaum, M. (2003). The multifaceted aspects of language maintenance: A new measure for its as-

sessment in immigrant families. Journal of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education, 6, 374–393. Tannenbaum, M., & Howie, P. (2002). The association between language maintenance and family rela-

tions: Chinese immigrant children in Australia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Develop- ment, 5, 408–424.

Titone, R. (1989). On the bilingual person. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Society for Italian Studies. Van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Sagi, A. (1999). Cross-cultural patterns of attachment: Universal and contex-

tual dimension. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 713–734). New York: Guilford.

Waters, E., & Deane, K. E. (1985). Defining and assessing individual differences in attachment rela- tionships: Q-methodology and the organization of behavior in infancy and early childhood. Mono- graphs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50, 41–65.

Weston, R. (1996). English language skills and parents’ well being. Family Matters, 45, 34–37. Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The maturational process and the facilitating environment. New York: Inter-

national Universities Press. Wong-Fillmore, L. (1991). When learning a second language means losing the first. Early Childhood

Research Quarterly, 6, 323–346.

252 TANNENBAUM