Ethnolinguistic identity theory:
a social psychological approach
to language maintenance
HOWARD GILES and PATRICIA JOHNSON
The study of language maintenance and erosion has traditionally been approached from a sociological perspective, and this is understandable given
that data are invariably collected at a macrolevel in terms of group tendencies.
At the same time, the people who constitute the collectivities examined have
of necessity to make up their own minds regarding whether to maintain their
ethnic tongue or let it erode. In other words, given that personal decisions are
being made and individual strategies enacted (albethey highly social), we feel
that language-maintenance theory would be enriched by a social psychological
input. As such, and in the context of language maintenance being an intergroup phenomenon to the extent that it is being fostered side by side or in
conflict with another group's language, cognitive processes relating to social
categorization, identity, comparison, attitude formation, attribution, and
second-language acquisition (among many others) have an important part to
play even at the macro-level. To this end, we argue that 'ethnolinguistic
identity theory' can provide a valuable new direction for furthering our
understanding of the variables and mechanisms involved in the maintenance
of an ethnic language in different social settings.
This theory was originally formulated to address the issue of who in an
ethnic group uses what language strategy, when, and why, in interethnic
encounters. More specifically, we were concerned with explaining why it
was that in certain situations some members of a group accentuate their
ethnolinguistic characteristics (be it by dialect, language, or whatever) when
conversing with outgroup speakers, while others converge toward them by
attenuating their linguistic distinctiveness. Now, the former divergent act can
be considered a special case of language maintenance (short-term) at the
micro-level. Indeed, this type of face-to-face strategy may arguably be an
instance of language maintenance par excellence in the sense that when an
outgroup language is the societal norm, ethnolinguistic differentiation can
invoke considerable social sanctions as a consequence. Moreover, in some
situations, little cognitive effort may be involved in maintaining one's own
dialect or language within the private and 'safe' confines of the home and
0165-2516/87/0068-0069 $2.00
© Mouton de Gruyter, Amsterdam
Int'l. J. Soc. Lang. 68 (1987), pp. 69-99
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
70
H. Giles and P. Johnson
other cohesive ingroup settings, but it is another matter as to whether this
strategy will generalize to the immediacy of intergroup encounters in the
wider society. In short, we believe that ethnolinguistic identity theory has
value in fostering our understanding of when individuals maintain or sacrifice
their ethnolinguistic identity in the short term of social interaction as well
as in the longer term of the group retaining or relinquishing their language as
a communicative code.
This paper begins by outlining our approach to ethnolinguistics and in
particular the psychological climate that is proposed to underlie language
•maintenance in interethnic exchanges. Ethnolinguistic identity theory is then
tested by means of a questionnaire methodology in Wales, and a number of
its basic tenets are confirmed. However, the data demonstrated some unexpected complexities between variables not accounted for previously, and
therefore the theory is reformulated as a consequence. In addition, it is
revised in order to meet the demands of situational factors and extended so as
to embrace recent developments in the fields of both second-language learning
and ethnic language attitudes. Most importantly, however, in the context of
this issue, we again argue that there is a conspicuous absence of a social
psychological input to language-maintenance studies and theory. Therefore,
we offer a revised and extended ethnolinguistic identity theory as a new
direction to this end. Finally, priorities for future research are proffered and
the notion of alternative conceptualizations of social identity discussed.
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
There has been a burgeoning of fruitful cross-disciplinary research examining
the relationship between language and ethnicity (for example, Edwards
1985). Nevertheless, the multiplicity of interethnic situations, attitudes to the
languages of ingroups and outgroups, and the ethnolinguistic strategies people
consequently adopt have retarded the development of any overall theory
which relates one situation to another and permits common explanation of
the many aspects which are discernible. We have been developing an approach
which seeks to clarify the empirical and theoretical confusion by identifying
common social psychological processes underlying diverse speech strategies.
This approach— 'ethnolinguistic identity theory' (see Beebe and Giles 1984;
Hildebrandt and Giles 1983) —has the advantage of taking into account
sociostructural influences on ethnic groups in contact and how they are
perceived by group members.
Ethnolinguistic identity theory draws heavily on the influential theory of
intergroup behavior by Tajfel and Turner (1979) called, 'social identity
theory', which is outlined as follows. We categorize the social world and,
hence, perceive ourselves as members of various groups. Such knowledge of
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
11
ourselves as group members is defined as our social identity, and it may be
positive or negative according to how our ingroups fare in social comparison
with relevant outgroups. It is argued that we strive to achieve a positive
identity by seeking dimensions which afford favorable comparison with
outgroups; in other words, we strive to achieve positive 'psychological distinctiveness' (see Tajfel 1982). Language comes into the picture when a group
regards its own language or speech variety as a dimension of comparison with
outgroups. Hence, people who define an encounter with a member of another
ethnic group as an intergroup one and value their language as a core aspect of
its identity will wish to assume a positive identity by means of adopting
various strategies of 'psycholinguistic distinctiveness' such as switching to
ingroup language, accentuating ethnic dialect and slang, etc. (see for example,
Bourhis et al. 1979; Taylor and Royer 1980). Indeed, it has been shown that
taking the opportunity to adopt strategies of differentiation in an intergroup
situation allows one a more positive self-concept as a consequence (Oakes and
Turner 1980).
Sometimes minority ethnic groups which possess a supposedly negative
social identity vis-ä-vis the dominant group(s) do not seem to adopt language
accentuation strategies. Tajfel and Turner (1979) suggest that social competition (which by implication would embrace ethnolinguistic differentiations)
comes about when people (a) strongly identify with their social group, and
(b) make insecure social comparisons between the positions of their group
socially and that of the outgroup. Such 'insecure social comparisons' would be
manifest in an awareness of cognitive alternatives to the extent that speakers
believed their group's (low) status was unfair and potentially changeable.
Ethnolinguistic identity theory goes on to suggest that although a person's
membership groups are each part of his or her social identity, they will not
all be equally salient at any one time. Moreover, it is only when groups'
linguistic characteristics (oftentimes ethnic ones) are salient that we should
expect the accentuation of ingroup speech markers as intergroup strategies.
Three variables are suggested as relevant here (perceived vitality, perceived
group boundaries, multiple group memberships) in that their nature can
increase or decrease the level of a person's sense of ethnic belongingness *
(Giles and Johnson 1981). Let us deal briefly with the three constructs in
turn.
Giles et al. (1977) suggested that ethnic groups could be compared in
terms of 'ethnolinguistic vitality' toward which three main groups of factors
contribute: status factors (such as economic, political, and linguistic prestige);
demographic factors (such as absolute numbers, birthrate, geographical
concentration); and institutional support (such as recognition of the group
and its language in the media, education, government). They proposed that
groups with high vitality are the ones most likely to thrive and remain distinct
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
72
H. Giles and P. Johnson
(see Allard and Landry 1985; Saint-Blancat 1985). However, the actions of
individual group members are likely to be governed less by the actual vitality
of their groups than by their perceptions of it (Bourhis and Sachdev 1984;
Giles et al. 1985; Young et al. 1986). Cues and Johnson (1981)suggested that
a high level of perceived vitality increases the salience of group identity for
members and thence intensifies their inclination to accentuate group speech
markers in order to establish favorable psycholinguistic distinctiveness.
Sociological and anthropological scholars have emphasized the importance
of social 'boundaries' (Banto 1983). It is maintained that group members try
to maintain a high level of perceived boundary hardness (Giles 1979; Huffines
1986) and this, when successful, clarifies ethnic categorization and norms for
conducting intergroup encounters, thereby increasing the salience of group
membership. Finally, those who see themselves as belonging to numerous
different, overlapping groups should possess a more diffuse social identity
than persons who view themselves as members of only one or two groups.
In other words, ethnolinguistic attachment should be stronger for those who
can identify with few other social categories. Moreover, the favorableness of
intergroup comparisons offered by nonethnolinguistic membership groups
will affect ethnolinguistic dimensions of identity, as will their status and
involvement level within each membership group.
The five major propositions relating to ethnolinguistic identity theory are
presented below. They constitute the hypotheses which frame the empirical
study conducted in Wales (see Williams 1978) which we report shortly as a
first step toward testing this theory. The dependent variable of ethnolinguistic
differentiation here was the extent to which Welsh-English bilinguals selfreported maintaining their use of the Welsh language in face-to-face encounters
with monolingual English speakers. The theory claims that people will define
an encounter in interethnic terms and strive for a positive ethnic identity by
accentuating their ingroup speech style to the extent (we hypothesize) that
they
1. identify themselves subjectively and strongly as members of a group which
considers language an important symbol of their identity;
2. make insecure social comparisons with the outgroup (for example, regard
their group's status as potentially changeable);
3. perceive their own group's vitality to be high;
4. perceive their ingroup boundaries to be hard and closed; and
5. identify strongly with few other social categories.
It is our contention that ethnic minority groups experiencing such a
psychological climate would not only be very likely to maintain their ethnolinguistic identity and diverge from an outgroup speaker, but would also be
less disposed to acquiring nativelike proficiency in the dominant group's
tongue (Giles and Byrne 1982) and be extremely keen to maintain use of the
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
73
ethnic tongue within the family context and beyond and expend energies in
this direction. The converse set of conditions should be conducive to interpersonal convergence toward an outgroup speaker, promote a strong motivation for acquiring nativelike proficiency in the dominant group tongue, and
ultimately foster ingroup language erosion or outgroup assimilation in the
family context and within their close social networks. In other words, we
argue that ethnolinguistic identity theory is relevant to short-term interactions
at the individual level as well as long-term group tendencies of language
maintenance and erosion. The study to be presented below is explicitly
concerned with testing the theory in the former regard but has obvious
implicit potency for the latter level of analysis too.
Method
Subjects
Thirty-four bilingual adolescents served as subjects (Ss) for this study. They
were 17 years of age, male, and used the self-referent 'Welsh' (rather than
British or English), and their first tongue was Welsh. They attended a bilingual
comprehensive school in Dyfed, a county characterized by a high proportion
of Welsh bilingual speakers (Williams 1979).
Materials
The questionnaire consisted of five sections. The first examined Ss' identification with the ethnic group and consisted of three ΙΟ-cm lines marked at either
end, 'extremely important to me' and 'not at all important to me'. Ss were
asked to rate the importance to them of their Welsh identity, the Welsh language, and the learning of Welsh by their future offspring. As these items
were found to intercorrelate very highly subsequently, they were summed in
order to provide an overall identification score (ID).
The second section examined Ss' perceptions of the degree of cognitive
alternatives to the current position of Wales with respect to Britain. Ss were
asked to rate on ΙΟ-cm, lines (marked appropriately at either end) the extent
to which they felt that Wales would remain a small part of Britain (item C),
and the extent to which they saw clear acceptable alternatives to Wales's
historical position as a minor part of Britain (CC). Finally, Ss were asked the
importance to them of the Welsh Nationalist Party (NAT).
The third section consisted of the 22-item subjective vitality questionnaire
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
74
H. Giles and P. Johnson
(VTT) compiled by Bourhis et al. (1981), which was adapted appropriately
for use in a Welsh/English context.
The fourth section was concerned with Ss' multiple group memberships
and boundaries^ two questions each respectively. Ss were asked again on
ΙΟ-cm lines (appropriately marked at either end) how many other groups
they identified with which were as important to them as was their Welshness
(item NO) — and to name examples of such groups — to what extent they
saw themselves as firstly and most importantly in terms of their Welshness
(FIR), the extent to which they agreed that Welsh speakers were the only
true Welsh people (WSP), and the extent to which they agreed that Welsh
and English people are clearly different with one never being able to become
the other (BD).
The fifth section was concerned with use of the Welsh language and
attitudes to it (see Bourhis 1983a), and this provided us with our measure
of linguistic differentiation from the English. These self-reported rating
questions were
When served by shop assistants who speak to you in English, how often do
you reply in Welsh?
When you are in shops, cinemas, pubs, clubs, etc., how often do you use
Welsh when you speak to strangers?
When you are in shops, cinemas, pubs, clubs, etc., how often do you speak
to strangers in English?
How often do you change from Welsh to English with someone who does not
speak Welsh very well?
How much do you enjoy switching to English in public places, like shops and
cinemas, when you are not understood in Welsh?
Finally, the following rating scales (agree-disagree) tapped bilinguals' attitudes to social norms prescribing the use of English:
Welsh people should not speak Welsh in the presence of English people.
If someone speaks to me in English, I should answer them in English.
I feel completely at ease speaking Welsh in public places or wherever I want
to.
W'elsh people should not speak Welsh just for the sake of English people.
The nine scales were summated for each subject in order to provide a composite differentiation score (DIFF). Ss were of course invited to append their
comments throughout the questionnaire.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
75
Results
Regarding the above measures, the sample as a whole can be characterized as
follows (the figures in brackets subsequent to the means indicate the minimum
and maximum scores). Ss identified very strongly with their Welsh group
membership (ID X = 28.5 [10-30], perceived a great stability in the status
quo position of Wales vis-ä-vis England (C and CC 3( = 7.4 and 7.0 respectively [1-10] and considered the Welsh Nationalist Party important to
them (NAT X = 7.0 [1-10]). They also indicated that they saw themselves
strongly as first and foremost 'Welsh', saw Welsh speakers as the only 'true
Welsh', and perceived clear hard boundaries between the Welsh and English
(FIR, WSP, and BD Xs=7.8, 7.3, 7.0 respectively [1-10]). While they
responded by claiming that there were a few other groups with which they
identified (NO X = 5.9 [1-10]), nearly all of those so generated related to
Welsh youth groups, clubs, and choirs, with a number of Ss indicating that
Welsh was salient to these groups by appending, 'in Welsh'; in other words,
these other groups were in actuality highly ethnic in character. Finally, Ss
perceived the vitality of their group to lie just below the midpoint of the
scale (VIT X = 227 [100-400]) which is not surprising for a 'subordinate'
ethnic group, but evinced a relatively high mean for the measure of likelihood of linguistic differentiation (DIFF X = 61.6 [9-90]).
The first major analysis conducted was a multiple regression performed
with all the variables on the DIFF measure as shown in Table 1. In other
words, we wished to determine which variables were the best predictors of
short-term language maintenance. The variables C and ID were entered in
steps 1 and 2 respectively (ps < 0.001), but no further variables were involved
Table 1. F values for the variables at each stage of stepping in the multiple regression
on likelihood of linguistic differentiation (DIFF)
Variable
C
ID
CC
VIT
FIR
WSP
BD
NO
NAT
Step no. 0
F to
F to
remove
enter
21.20
14.60
0.93
2.18
2.62
11.40
5.82
0.09
9.70
Step no. 1
F to
F to
remove
enter
Step no. 2
Fto
Fto
remove
enter
21.20
12.09
6.41
6.41
0.73
3.44
1.58
1.21
0.83
0.66
0.97
\
1.85
1.63
0.99
0.98
0.76
0.14
0.02
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
76
H. Giles and P. Johnson
as the F levels were insufficient for further stepping. It can be seen from
Table 1 that the variable accounting for the greatest amount of variance was
C (that is, attitudes to the statement, 'Wales will always remain a small part
of Britain') reflecting the perception of instability in the present intergroup
hierarchy. When this variable was entered, the F values for WSP, NAT, and
BD were noticeably reduced, indicating associations between these four
items. The ID variable accounted for the second greatest amount of variance.
The apparent associations between a number of the variables suggested that
it would be useful to examine these further via a correlational analysis, and
the results are shown in Table 2.
As expected from the previous analysis, C, WSP, NAT and BD formed a
positively correlated cluster. Although FIR and NO were not correlated with
DIFF, they were with WSP, while FIR correlated with BD. ID was positively
correlated with C, NAT, and DIFF. It can be seen from Table 2 that VIT was
not correlated with any of the other variables.
It seems possible, despite our original theoretical inclinations, that VIT
might be orthogonal to ID, and that dividing Ss post hoc on the basis of their
ID and VIT scores might yield interesting results for our language-maintenance
measure, DIFF; accordingly, Ss were divided into these four quadrants. High
identifiers were those who scored the maximum of 30 on the ID measure and
low identifiers were those who scored less than this maximum. Examination
of the data suggested that taking the median was the most appropriate
dividing point for determining high and low vitality groups, t tests on both
the ID and VIT scores between the quadrants verified that the four groups
were statistically different. A 2 χ 2 ANOVA on these independent variables
with DIFF as the dependent variable was then performed. While a main effect
emerged for ID in the sense that high identifiers were more likely to differentiate than low scores (Fl.29 = 20.64, p. < 0.000Ϊ), a significant interaction
qualified this pattern (F = 5.13; p < 0.03) with Newman-Keuls analyses being
utilized to explore this effect further. For Ss who identified less strongly with
the Welsh group, the perception of high vitality resulted in a higher DIFF
score than those who perceived the group to have low vitality (Xs = 54.75 and
40.5 respectively, ρ < 0.01). However, for those who identified more strongly
with their ethnic group, the perception of low vitality was associated with
higher DIFF scores than for those who perceived vitality to be high (Xs = 64.75
and 70.38 respectively, ρ < 0.06). The results support the notion that VIT
and ID are orthogonal here.
Discussion
The results support hypotheses 1 and 2 in that anticipated language maintenance was a function of ethnic identification and making insecure social
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
77
* * * * *
*
* * **
*
* *
o
r-f-ioo^-ONONr^vo
vo c o r - o o i o r ^ i - H O N » o
»O
V O * - H " * O e S « O C O C S
vo
VO
*-H
o
CO
τ!· es
^ es
VO
VO
CS
Q
PQ
es
es
^·
O
«-H
O
CO
CS
ON
VO
00
fH
Ο
O
O
CN
oo «o
co es
Ό
Ο
VO
Ο
CO
"*
Ο
»Ο
VO
l—
O
Tt
CO
r*· co oo vo oo
v
**
**
ON
PH
r- ON
α
es
CO
^
T-H
v—l
g
E
O
es
g
%
vo
»o
es
**
**
**
«ο
ιο
CO
ON
rι—ι
VO
*r> oo
O ON co
es es co
es
co
o
co
oo
T-H
q
V
o.
*
*
*
oT
q
CO
ON
IO
es
V
P,
ON
O
•g B
s
CO
V
PH
£
Β
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
78
H. Giles and P. Johnson
comparisons. It may seem paradoxical at first sight that the latter variable
accounted for more variance than the former, given that if individuals did not
identify with the group presumably they would not care whether or not its
low-status position was unstable or not. However, it must be recalled that all
Ss identified very highly with the Welsh group and the fact that strength of
identification accounted for any of the variance in this instance indicates the
potency of its effect.
The associations between a number of the variables suggested by the
multiple-regression results were supported by examination of the correlations
between all the variables. The 'perceived instability' variable, perception of
the group boundaries as hard and closed, agreement that 'Welsh speakers are
the only true Welsh', and allegiance to the Welsh Nationalist Party formed a
positively correlated cluster and were also positively correlated with the
likelihood of linguistic differentiation. These results offer some support for
the association between hard and closed perceived boundaries and the likelihood of linguistic differentiation (that is, hypothesis 4). The association
between C and NAT is unsurprising in view of the aims of this political party.
Yet the lack of association between the latter variable and the perception of
'clear and acceptable alternatives to Wales's current position' suggests that
these alternatives may include options other than political dissociation from
England.
The lack of any significant relations in this study between CC and DIFF is
surprising in view of the tenets of social identity theory (Tajfel 1978). However, as indicated at the outset of this paper, the perception of instability and
unfairness in the status hierarchy are considered to be precursors to the
perception of cognitive alternatives, and these in turn are likely to precede
awareness of concrete alternatives. It is possible that the variable relating to
'clear and acceptable alternatives' was tapping awareness of the latter rather
than of more cognitive alternatives, and this may account for the lack of
significant effects for this variable in the study. It is unfortunate that no
measure was included herein of the Ss' perceptions of unfairness. Nevertheless,
a number of Ss' comments (particularly of those who identified more strongly
with the ingroup) indicated that they did perceive the low status of their
group to be illegitimate. For example, over half of the stronger identifiers
commented 'too much/not enough' alongside the vitality items referring to
the power and wealth of the English and Welsh groups respectively. Hypothesis 5 relating to multiple group memberships was not supported in that
neither FIR nor NO was related to DIFF. Nevertheless, these variables did
yield some interesting effects. A weak positive correlation between them
indicated that the more groups Ss identified with, the more they saw themselves firstly and most importantly as Welsh. This intuitive contradiction is
dispelled once one recalls the nature of these other social groups, that is, they
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
79
were highly Welsh in cultural focus. The more Ss saw themselves as Welsh, the
more groups they were likely to identify with which supported their allegiance
with the Welsh group and language. This is supported in Ss' own comments:
for instance, one informant wrote, 'Welshness is not a cult or companion but
a way of life, a medium for all spheres of life'. Here then identification with
a greater number of associated categories was related to seeing themselves
firstly and most importantly as Welsh and with seeing Welsh speakers as the
only 'true Welsh'. The latter two variables (see Table 2) were also associated
with the perception of hard and closed boundaries, which in turn was
associated with linguistic differentiation; causal pathway analyses could be
fruitful in future research (see Gardner 1985).
The above interpretation is supported by Milroy's (1982) findings of
positive correlations between the level of social integration (in terms of
multiple ties to other group members) and use of the nonstandard language
variety of the group. She discussed this correlation 'by referring to the widely
accepted anthropological view that a close-knit network has the capacity to
function as a norm enforcement mechanism and insulate its members from
the pressures of mainstream values - including linguistic values' (1982: 212).
Other studies have supported the association between close-knit localized
network structures and adherence to low-status language variety (Gal 1979).
In addition, Wong-Reiger and Taylor (1981) suggest that one way by which
individuals resolve the apparent paradox of achieving a unitary self-identity
while being members of many different groups is through identifying with
those which share the same values (for example, with respect to the use of
a nonstandard language variety).
The lack of any significant correlations between perceived vitality and any
of the other variables and, in particular, strength of identification suggested
that VIT was orthogonal to ID. This was found to be the case, with high VIT
associated with greater DIFF for those who identified less strongly with the
ethnic group, while the reverse was true for those who identified strongly
with the group. Thus, hypothesis 3 was not supported but may usefully be
considered in terms of the perceptions of group norms and the group's
potential for applying sanctions against those who do not comply with these.
Such a perspective is particularly relevant here where the DIFF measure
included not only self-reports of language maintenance but also attitudes to
social norms relating to the use of Welsh.
Where language is a salient dimension of ethnic group identity, as is the
case for our Welsh bilingual Ss, group norms are likely to prescribe use of the
ingroup language. Furthermore, those who perceive the group as having high
VIT are more likely to perceive the group norms in these terms, that is, as
prescribing language loyalty. In contrast, those who identify less strongly
with the ethnic group and perceive its vitality to be low may perceive the
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
80
H. Giles and P. Johnson
group norm differently, as they may see the language as dying, if not dead.
In addition, Bourhis (1979) suggests that the higher the vitality of a group,
the more resources it has available for rewarding or sanctioning those who
do or do not comply with group norms. Sanctioning may include the use
of abuse, traitor labels, and negative evaluations, while rewards may include
positive support and evaluations. Accordingly, it is suggested that the more
vitality an individual perceives the group to have, the more resources it will
be perceived to have for applying rewards/sanctions for (non)compliance with
group norms relating to use of the ethnic language. On the other hand, those
who perceive the ethnic group to have low vitality may not only perceive
the group norms differently, but may also consider the group to have few
resources available for enforcing its norms.
These results may be considered in the light of Turner et al.'s (1984) work
relating to the concepts of cognitive dissonance and commitment principles
(Harvey and Smith 1977). They suggest that where there is voluntary group
membership, group 'failure' (for instance, in our situation, as reflected in low
vitality or low differentiation from the outgroup) will increase group cohesion
(see Taylor et al. 1983). Where there is involuntary group membership, group
cohesion will decrease when there is a perception of group 'failure' and increase where there is success. Furthermore, Giles (1979) suggested that in
these situations, ethnic speech markers can be a more overt and flexible
expression of social differentiation than their nonlinguistic counterparts (see
Huffines 1986). Since high identifiers may be considered those with a greater
degree of voluntary group membership and low vitality may be construed as
group failure, then this perspective would lead one to expect greater group
cohesion and linguistic differentiation among high ID and low VIT individuals.
Conversely, low identifiers may be considered those with a greater degree of
involuntary group membership and, correspondingly, would be expected to
feel more group cohesion and evince language maintenance when they construe the group's vitality to be high rather than low.
A number of Ss' comments supported the interpretation that in some cases
low VIT may spur efforts to maintain the ethnic language and trigger actions
to bolster its vitality. For example, one informant (high ID/low VIT) commented, Ί think that the Welsh language has a future if we all decide that
the language is going to live and do everything possible to ensure that it has
a future.' This type of attitude was reflected in the comment of another
respondent: 'This [the survival of the Welsh group and language] will be up
to us and the strength of activist movements, because the Welsh people and
the Welsh language are one and once the latter disappears the former will also
be lost.' These remarks also support Sweeting's (1982) interpretations of
her study with Gaelic Scots learners. She found that Scots learning Gaelic
perceived the vitality of Gaelic (as measured by the subjective vitality ques-
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistie identity theory
81
tionnaire) to be lower than did either other Scots or English controls (residing
in Scotland) who were not learning this language. Sweeting suggests, in the
light of her Ss' comments, that this perception (while possibly reflecting
greater 'factual' knowledge about the language) may increase rather than
decrease desires to learn and support the language as the Gaelic learners are
striving to revive a 'dying language'. She also points out that this perception
of the low VIT of the language may also represent a positive strategy for
enhancement of self-identity in the contribution the learners feel they are
making to revive Gaelic. A similar analysis can be applied at the societal
level when one considers the resolve of Francophones in Quebec to ensure
the vitality of the French language when they perceived it to be seriously
threatened (Laporte 1983). This is underlined when one considers that for
this group the Charter of the French Language remains the most popular
legislative act promulgated by the Quebec government.
It is still expected, however, that there exists a 'point of no return' at
which very weak or threatened vitality virtually eliminates the likelihood that
the language group will survive and act as a collective entity. Such a situation
seems most likely when the group boundaries are soft, allowing those who
identify weakly with the group to leave it. In this case, the 'point of no
return' would be reached (albeit accepting future forces for 'language resurrection'; see Eastman 1979) when the number of highly committed (and
Voluntary') group members decreased to the extent that they 'gave up'.
Yet before this stage, the perception of low group vitality may stimulate
efforts to support the language group among its members.
A further analysis
The findings above suggested that ethnic identification and perceived vitality
were determining the self-reported strength of language maintenance independently. This was interpreted in terms of the group's perceived 'success/
failure', potential for applying rewards/sanctions for compliance/noncompliance, and the degree to which ethnic group membership was perceived to
be voluntary. The notion of voluntary/involuntary membership and hence
the perception that one can or cannot move easily between group memberships relates very well with the perception of ethnic boundaries as hard and
closed. This interpretation, together with the lack of significant correlations
between ID, BD, and VIT suggests that it might be worth exploring the possibility that identification, boundaries, and vitality interact in their influence
on language maintenance (DIFF). To this end, further post hoc analyses were
performed on the data. Unfortunately, there were insuffficient Ss for a
2x2x2 ANOVA (with ID, BD, and VIT as independent variables) and DIFF
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
82
H. Giles and P. Johnson
as the dependent variable to make this ideal analysis viable. Instead, three
separate 2x2 ANOVAs were performed with each of the three variables as the
dependent variable in turn in the hope that they might cast some light on the
influences of these variables on each other.
The first of these analyses involved ID and BD as independent variables
and VIT as the dependent variable. There emerged a significant main effect
for ID, with stronger identifiers perceiving vitality to be lower than weaker
identifiers (F1.30 = 4.04, ρ < 0.05), with an interactive tendency between
them (F = 3.41, ρ < 0.07). Newman-Keuls analysis of the latter showed that
for weak identifiers, vitality was perceived to be higher by those who perceived
boundaries to be hard and closed (X = 254) rather than soft and open (X
= 232; ρ < 0.05). For those who identified more strongly with the ethnic
group, vitality is perceived to be higher by those who perceived boundaries
to be soft and open (X = 230) rather than hard and closed (X = 214; ρ <
0.05).
The second analysis involved ID and VIT as independent variables with BD
as the dependent variable. The only effect to emerge was a main one for ID,
with those who identified more strongly perceiving boundaries to be harder
and more closed (X = 7.75) than those who identified less strongly with
their ethnic group (X = 5.38; F = 6.49, ρ < 0.02). The final analysis examined
BD and VIT with ID as the dependent variable but no significant effects
emerged.
The results of these ANOVAs can only be taken as tentative for a couple
of reasons. First, the 'independent' variables have some degree of interdependence. Second, the small range of scores for ID are loaded at one end of the
scale, with all Ss identifying relatively strongly with the ingroup; that is, they
are asymmetrically distributed, and in addition the small range of scores
suggests that significant effects of the BD and VIT variables are less likely to
emerge. Nevertheless, with those cautionary notes in mind, the results do
suggest that the three variables may interact and are mutually influential. In
sum, they suggest that those who identify more strongly with the ethnic
group may perceive group boundaries to be harder and more closed than
those who identify less strongly. Furthermore, strong identifiers may perceive
vitality to be lower than those who identify less strongly with the group,
particularly when they perceive group boundaries to be hard and closed
rather than soft and open. In contrast, weaker identifiers may perceive
vitality to be higher, particularly when they perceive boundaries to be hard
and closed rather than soft and open.
These reanalyses may be interpreted once again in terms of commitment
principles. In this vein, strong identifiers are likely to be very committed to
the group when they perceive boundaries to be hard and closed, and to be
even more so when they perceive their group's vitality to be low. As we saw
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
83
earlier, such a cognitive constellation is likely to be the breeding ground for
language maintenance. It is suggested that they are likely to show ingroup
solidarity and a low tolerance for what we shall call societal norms imposed
by the dominant group, such as use of English in their presence (see Giles and
Johnson 1986). Those who identify strongly with the ethnic group but perceive
boundaries to be softer and more open may be more voluntarily committed
to the group and perceive it to have higher vitality (that is, group 'success').
If also seems likely that their strong identification with the ingroup may
lead to a hardening of group boundaries when interethnic discrimination
occurs. This will facilitate the categorization of in- and outgroup members,
allowing a more secure, clearer sense of identity and more firmly established
group norms.
For weaker identifiers, the perception of hard and closed boundaries may
increase commitment to the group, but weaker identification suggests that
this commitment is more involuntary than for those who strongly identify.
They may therefore be more likely to perceive the group's vitality as higher,
reflecting group 'success', and, as we indicated earlier, such individuals are
more likely to differentiate linguistically from the outgroup than comparable
others who perceive ingroup vitality to be low. This may be related to the
group's perceived potential for applying sanctions against those who do not
conform to ingroup norms, for example, regarding Welsh language use. It is
suggested therefore that these individuals are likely to evidence lower solidarity
with the group but relatively high conformity to group norms. In contrast,
those who identify less strongly and perceive group boundaries to be softer
and more open are likely to be less committed to the group and also to
perceive the possibility of leaving it (Tajfel 1974). Analyses above suggest
that these individuals are likely to perceive ingroup vitality as low as well and
this perceived 'failure' may further weaken commitment to the group. The
group may also be viewed as having less potential for applying real sanctions
or rewards for (non)compliance with its norms, and these individuals are less
likely to differentiate linguistically. It is suggested that they are likely to
show less ingroup solidarity and greater tolerance for societal norms than the
other subgroups above.
Reformulations and extensions of ethnolinguistic identity theory
Based on the above, albeit modest, data and interpretations, not to mention
their consequential refutation of our hypotheses, the following are considered
to improve upon the original propositions of ethnolinguistic identity theory.
More specifically, the first three of these are considered as articulating the
predispositional conditions under which individual ethnic group members
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
84
H. Giles and P. Johnson
will be more or less likely to define many interethnic encounters in terms of
ethnicity and to be resolute in their language-maintenance strategies. In this
way, they highlight the heterogeneity of the ethnic group as well as indicating
implicitly the dynamic nature of the processes contributing to this. The
first set of propositions relates to those individuals who are predisposed to
act in terms of ethnic solidarity:
I. Members of a subordinate ethnic group which considers language to
be an important dimension of its identity are likely to be predisposed to
acting in terms of ethnic solidarity rather than conformity to societal norms
in many interethnic situations, to define many interethnic situations in terms
of their ethnicity, and to maintain their distinctive language features, when
they
(a) identify very strongly with their ethnic group;
(b) make insecure social comparisons with the outgroup (for example,
are aware of cognitive alternatives to their own group's status
position);
(c) identify with few other nonethnic social categories whose norms
and values do not overlap with those of the ethnic group, perceive
the social identities deriving from these as relatively inadequate, and
perceive their status within the ethnic group to be higher than their
intragroup status within their other social category memberships;
and
(di) perceive their ingroup boundaries to be hard and closed; while they
(βχ) perceive their ethnic group to have low vitality;
or
(d2) perceive their ingroup boundaries to be soft and open; while they
(e2 ) perceive their ethnic group to have high vitality.
The second set of propositions relates to members of the ethnic group
who identify less strongly with it but perceive the ethnic boundaries to be
hard and closed; these individuals may be considered to be more involuntarily
committed to the group. The perception of high vitality may reflect group
'success' and increase commitment to it, but it may also be seen as indicating
the group's high potential for applying sanctions/rewards for (non)compliance
to group language norms. They are likely to define fewer interethnic situations in terms of their ethnic identity than those depicted in the previous
proposition and have the propensity to act in terms of conformity to group
norms. Therefore,
II. Members of a subordinate ethnic group which considers language an
important dimension of its identity are likely to be predisposed to acting in
terms of conformity to ingroup rather than societal norms in many inter-
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
85
ethnic situations, but to evidence only weak or moderate ethnic solidarity,
to define fewer interethnic situations in terms of their ethnic identity, and
to be less likely to maintain their distinctive language features, when they
(a) identify only moderately with the ethnic group;
(b) make insecure social comparisons with the outgroup;
(c) identify with few other nonethnic social categories whose norms
and values do not overlap with those of the ethnic group, perceive
the social identities deriving from these as relatively inadequate, and
perceive their status within the ethnic group to be higher than their
intragroup status within other social category memberships;
(d) perceive their ingroup boundaries to be hard and closed;
(e) perceive their ethnic group to have high vitality.
The third set of propositions relates to individuals who identify less
strongly with the group and perceive its boundaries to be soft and open. They
may be considered voluntarily and weakly committed to the group, and the
perception of low ingroup vitality may reflect group 'failure', thereby further
weakening commitment to it. In addition, it may reflect the group's low
potential for applying sanctions/rewards for (non)compliance with group
norms. Such persons are therefore considered likely to evidence weak ethnic
solidarity and will likely conform more to societal norms rather than to
ingroup ones in many situations. Therefore,
III. Members of a subordinate group which considers language probably
not that important a dimension of its group identity are likely to be predisposed to acting in terms of conformity to societal rather than ethnic
ingroup norms and to evidence weak ethnic solidarity, to define few interethnic situations in terms of their ethnic identity, and to be less likely to
maintain their distinctive language features, when they
(a) identify only moderately or weakly with the ethnic group;
(b) make secure social comparisons with the outgroup (for example, are
not aware of cognitive alternatives to their own group's status
position);
(c) identify with a number of other nonethnic social categories whose
norms and values do not overlap with those of the ethnic group,
perceive the social identities deriving from these as relatively adequate, and perceive their status within the ethnic group to be lower
than their intragroup status within their other social category
memberships;
(d) perceive their ingroup boundaries to be soft and open;
(e) perceive their ethnic group to have low vitality.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
86
H. Giles and P. Johnson
We would like to go beyond the data presented above and argue that there
are situational variables which are likely to override these predispositional
backdrops in some circumstances, such that either many or few ethnic
group members are likely to act in terms of their ethnic identity and use
the ethnic ingroup language.
The findings of Giles and Johnson (1986), together with the tenets of
speech-accommodation theory (Beebe and Giles 1984), suggest that predispositional tendencies of individuals to define interactions and act m terms
of ethnic solidarity may be influenced by (a) the desire to maintain communicational efficiency, and (b) status-stressing features of the situation
(Ball et al. 1984). The latter may highlight societal norms favoring use of the
dominant group's speech style and/or increase the perceived costs in using
their own lower-status ethnic ingroup speech. In addition, Giles and Johnson
(1986) have shown that the perceived centrality of an ethnic threat may be a
salient determinant of the likelihood that ethnic group members will anticipate maintaining their ingroup speech style in interethnic encounters (see
Gallois et al. 1984; Taylor et al. 1983). It can be argued that, while those who
are disposed to acting in terms of ethnic solidarity are likely to perceive more
ethnic threats as central to their valued ethnic identity (and Overinclude'),
those who are predisposed to acting in terms of conformity to ingroup
norms or to societal norms may perceive fewer ethnic threats as central to
their less positively valued sense of ethnicity (and Overexclude'). However,
it is also suggested that there will be some ethnic threats which will be perceived by most ethnic group members to be central to their sense of ethnicity,
when most ethnic group members will therefore be likely to differentiate
from the threatening interactant and maintain their ethnic language. Conversely, there are likely to be some ethnic threats which few group members
will perceive to be central to their sense of ethnic identity, when few ethnic
group members will therefore be likely to differentiate linguistically.
A further factor influencing the likelihood that an interaction will be
defined in terms of ethnicity may be the degree of overlap with the other
interactant in terms of shared (nonethnic) group memberships (Giles and
Johnson 1981). If two individuals from different ethnic groups identify
with a number of other common groups then the ethnolinguistic differences
between them may have to be more salient for them to define the interaction
in interethnic terms than if they shared fewer common membership groups,
particularly if the shared group memberships are salient in the interaction.
The following propositions, then, are meant to provide a useful complement
to propositions I-III earlier, in that they identify the centrality of a perceived
ethnic threat as a salient determinant of the likelihood of interethnic definitions and linguistic differentiation. They also highlight the ways in which
situational factors override the predispositional tendencies of individual
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
87
group members to act in terms of ethnic solidarity. These propositions then
are the following:
IV. Few subordinate ethnic group members are likely to define interethnic situations in terms of their ethnic identity and to differentiate socially
by language maintenance when they
(a) are not strongly committed to an attitude position on which another
interactant opposes them and they perceive the issue to be peripheral to their sense of ethnic identity;
(b) perceive a number of features of the situation to emphasize statusstressing rather than solidarity-stressing dimensions (for example,
the other interactant is of a higher status on a number of dimensions
salient to the subordinate group members);
(c) are concerned to maintain communicational efficiency;
(d) perceive a large degree of overlap with their interactant in terms of
other shared group memberships.
Under these conditions, most ethnic group members are likely to attenuate
their ethnic speech markers in order to preserve their value systems as 'good
members of society'. Speech convergence toward the dominant outgroup
member in this context may also function to categorize such accommodators
as belonging to a common group with the other interactant. Such a strategy,
if occurring frequently enough, is likely in the longer term to contribute to a
decrease in ethnic ingroup identification, a weakening of the ethnic boundaries,
and a lowering of group vitality, and hence it facilitates the climate for
ingroup language suicide to occur (Denison 1977).
V. Many subordinate group members are likely to define interethnic
situations in terms of their ethnic identity and to differentiate socially by
language maintenance, when they
(a) are strongly committed to an attitude position on which another
interactant opposes them and they perceive the issue to be central
to their sense of ethnic identity;
(b) perceive few features of the situation to emphasize status-stressing
rather than solidarity-stressing dimensions or the other interactant
is perceived to have violated social norms (for example, by making
the issue more personal);
(c) are not concerned to maintain communicational efficiency;
(d) perceive little overlap with their interactant in terms of other shared
group memberships.
Accentuation of ethnic speech markers, or divergence here, may function to
preserve value systems and to ideologize group action with respect to the
outgroup. Such a strategy, if occurring frequently enough, is obviously
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
88
H. Giles and P. Johnson
going to increase the likelihood of intercultural communication breakdown
(Hewstone and Giles 1986), to increase ingroup identification, to strengthen
group boundaries and vitality, and to promote the psychological climate
necessary for language maintenance. This would be particularly so in cases
where the dominant group showed no policy signs of offering genuine motivational support for the survival of the ethnic language institutionally (see
Genesee et al. 1983).
In sum, propositions IV and V are considered to identify when either few
or many ethnic group members are likely to maintain their ethnic speech
style. They are complemented by the earlier sets of propositions (I-III),
specifying which members are most likely to use the ethnic speech style,
but are considered to encapsulate conditions which may override the predispositional tendencies of individual group members described by the
earlier propositions. Under these conditions, the functions of the language
strategies individuals are likely to adopt were suggested above, indicating
why the ethnic speech style may be used. These reformulated propositions
of ethnolinguistic identity theory contribute more succinctly now to an
understanding of who in an ethnic group is likely to maintain use of the
ethnic speech style, when, and why. Figure 1 below is a model which attempts
schematically to encapsulate in summary form the variables and processes
operating in ethnolinguistic identity theory which we have articulated in this
paper.
Implications for related theoretical frameworks
Reformulated ethnolinguistic identity theory has revisional implications not
only for its precursor, speech-accommodation theory (Giles 1984), but also
for its satellite models in second-language acquisition (Giles and Byrne 1982)
and ethnic language attitudes (Ryan et al. 1984). Space of course precludes
more than ä mere outline of these implications, which, in the case of accommodation theory, will be taken up elsewhere. Suffice it to say that the
propositions above specify more concretely than hitherto the social psychological conditions under which speakers in intergroup contexts will converge
to outgroup others or maintain their language features in defiance of them.
In particular, notions of situational threat, message content, and the interrelationships between intergroup variables (that is, between identification,
perceived vitality, and boundaries) will figure prominently in the revised
formulation of accommodation theory.
The intergroup model of second-language acquisition (Giles and Byrne
1982) suggested that many of the propositions inherent in ethnolinguistic
identity theory were a key to understanding the factors which promote and
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
89
Ethnic identification
(commitment)
U
Perceived
id boui
boundaries
(hardness and
and cl<
closedness)
Ο
Subjective vitality
(group's perceived 'success/
failure' and potential for
rewarding/sanctioning)
increases
identification;
strengthens
boundaries;
enhances
vitality
decreases ·
identification;
weakens
boundaries;
decreases
vitality
Predisposition to act in terms of
ethnic solidarity/higher status group
memberships (and
conformity to
societal norms)
define more
situations in
terms of ethnicity
('overinclude')
many 'solidarity-stressing' inter
ethnic situations
s, more likelihood of
ethnolinguistic
differentiation
define fewer
situations in
terms of ethnicity
Coverexclude')
\
many 'status-stressing' inter
ethnic situations
less likelihood ofv
ethnolinguistic *
differentiation
Figure 1. Situational and predispositional influences on the likelihood of ethnolinguistic differentiation
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
90
H. Giles and P. Johnson
impede the minority groups' learning of a dominant ethnic group's tongue.
Subsequent to the appearance of this paper, research has supported as well as
called for extensions to other social psychological models in second-language
learning (Gardner 1985), yet none of these have addressed empirically the
variables and processes inherent in the intergroup model. Hence, we can
now suggest that a minority-group individual's lack of oral proficiency in a
dominant-group language is not so much a function of the hypotheses which
led to the present research (see subgroup A, Giles and Byrne 1982) as to the
conditions laid down in proposition I above. Similarly, proficiency in such a
second language is not so much the converse of this paper's hypotheses (see
subgroup B, Giles and Byrne 1982) as it is a function of the psychological
conditions specified in proposition III herein. It could be argued that the
'in-betweeners' highlighted in proposition II (see also Ball et al. 1984) would
be those most susceptible to the particular pedagogical environment (that is,
variations in methods and teaching skills) in which the learner acquires the
language. Furthermore, the present data lead us to reappraise the notion of
Oral proficiency' as represented in the intergroup model; therein it appears
overly static and acontextual. Thus, apparent L2 proficiency is likely to depend on the nature of the situation along the lines of propositions IV and V
above in which it is measured. For instance, those for whom even proposition
I is 'true' might still evince a fair degree of proficiency under the contextual
conditions of proposition IV, while those for whom proposition III is 'true'
might be more reluctant to proffer L2 oral skills under conditions manifest in
proposition V.
Turning to language-attitudes theory, Ryan and associates (Ryan et al.
1982, 1984) identified sociostructural determinants considered to be salient
to the type of language-attitude profiles in a speech community and the
evaluative constructs which may be used in their assessment. The processes
involved are considered in terms of a temporal cycle of intergroup relations
(see Taylor and McKirnan 1984) and four language profiles are explicated in
terms of the assessments of the higher-status and lower-status ethnic-group
speech styles. It is suggested now that the language-attitude profiles of different members of a subordinate group are influenced by their perceptions of
their identification with the ethnic group and the other variables identified
in the revised propositions of ethnolinguistic identity theory above. Thus,
language attitudes which different members of the subordinate group are
likely to hold may be considered in terms of their predispositions to act in
terms of ethnic solidarity/conformity to ingroup norms/conformity to
societal norms. In addition, the findings of Giles and Johnson (1986) suggest
that when individuals are acting in terms of ethnic solidarity rather than
conformity to societal norms, they are likely to use more differentiated
constructs in their evaluations of ethnically threatening and supportive
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
91
speakers. That is, they may be likely to up-/downgrade those who offer
support for/threat to a valued aspect of their ethnic identity, whether they
are defined as in- or outgroup members on the basis of noncontent speechstyle cues. Together these considerations result in a set of propositions
relating to the language-attitude profiles different members of a subordinate
group are likely to hold. At the present time, theories in the areas of ethnic
language performance and ethnic language attitudes have been quite autonomous and reflected quite separate literatures. Below, then, we are not only
proposing a modest extension to language-attitude theory but suggesting that
both these fields of inquiry might profit from their being considered in
tandem, particularly given that language attitudes oftentimes mediate speechstyle performance (Giles and Street 1985). In other words, we are extending
ethnolinguistic identity theory herein to encompass related processes operating in ethnic language attitudes. The propositions therefore are as follows:
VI.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Subordinate ethnic group members who are disposed to acting
in terms of ethnic solidarity rather than conformity to societal
norms (proposition I herein) are likely to upgrade those who
support the ethnic group, whether in- or outgroup members,
and the ingroup speech style, particularly on traits relating to
the solidarity dimension (for example, kind) and other salient
ingroup dimensions. (Their language attitude profile is therefore likely to resemble the appropriate component of pattern
C described by Ryan et al. 1982,1984.)
Subordinate ethnic group members who are disposed to acting
in terms of conformity to ingroup norms (proposition II herein) are likely to upgrade the ethnic ingroup speech style on
traits relating to the solidarity dimension while downgrading it
on traits relating to the status dimension (for example, intelligent), and vice-versa for the higher-status ethnic speech style.
(Their language attitude profile is therefore likely to resemble
the appropriate component of pattern B as described by Ryan
et al. 1982,1984.)
Subordinate ethnic group members who are predisposed to
acting in terms of conformity to societal norms (proposition
III herein) are likely to upgrade the higher-status ethnic speech
style relative to the lower-status ingroup speech style, particularly on traits relating to the status dimension. (Their language
attitude profile is therefore likely to resemble the appropriate
component of pattern A in Ryan et al. 1982, 1984.)
Proposition VI then elaborates on previous language-attitude models in
identifying more clearly the influences of ethnolinguistic identity theory
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
92
H. Giles and P. Johnson
variables on the language attitudes subordinate ethnic group members are
likely to hold. In addition, they complement the earlier propositions I-III
in identifying the language attitudes which mediate the language strategies
adopted. Finally, it is suggested that under the conditions defined by proposition IV, where few ethnic group members are likely to define interactions in
terms of their ethnic identity, speech-style evaluations are likely to resemble
those of proposition VI(c) above. Under these conditions, greater emphasis
is likely to be given to societal norms than to ethnic solidarity, and speechstyle evaluations are likely to resemble those of traditional matched-guise
studies. In contrast, under conditions specified by proposition V, where
many subordinate ethnic group members are considered likely to define
interactions in terms of their ethnic identity, speech-style evaluations are
likely to resemble those of proposition VI(a) above. Under these conditions,
greater emphasis is likely to be afforded ethnic solidarity than societal norms,
and upgrading of the ingroup speech style and ethnically supportive speakers
is likely to occur, particularly on solidarity traits. Thus, together with the
preceding sets of jpropositions I-V, proposition VI may be seen as reflecting
the ways in which language attitudes are influenced by both social and
personal variables highlighting either ethnic ingroup solidarity or societal
norms.
Conclusions and future priorities
On the basis of an admittedly small sample of young Welshmen using selfreport data (see Bourhis 1984), we have reformulated ethnolinguistic identity
theory in modest ways for subordinate ethnic groups and extended it into
the domain of ethnic language attitudes having implications for the intergroup model of second-language acquisition. All in all, the empirical data (and
this is the first of its kind to be reported) supported some of the main original
tenets of our theory and have demonstrated the complex relations between
its core variables. Although this approach focuses upon language strategies in
the immediacy of intergroup contact, we are now that much more confident
that social psychological processes ought to feature in language-maintenance
theory at the macro-level.
As indicated at the outset, most research in the latter tradition has been
macrosociological in orientation, and one recent study which included attitude measures in the design (McAllister and Mughan 1984) found no effect
for their mediating role in language maintenance. The implicit conclusion
from this study was that psychological variables play at best an extremely
minor role in the context of structural forces at play. Now while we would
not wish to elevate them to a primary status in this regard we would like
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
93
to point out that their relative status can only be gleaned from empirical
investigations which examine variables and processes promulgated in ethnolinguistic identity theory. In other words, a recourse to gross variables such
as ingroup-outgroup attitudes does not do *eal justice to the potential role of
psychological processes in language maintenance/erosion. In sum, we would
suggest that propositions I-III in particular are those which fashion the
psychological climate necessary for language maintenance, language indifference, and language suicide, respectively. Obviously, their role at this macrolevel is likely to be a function of the historico-structural forces existing in
particular language-conflict situations, and so we are simply scratching the
obvious complexity of the theoretical surface at present. Nevertheless, as the
title of this special issue implies, we are, and in concert with Bourhis (1983b),
opening up what we believe to be fruitful areas of inquiry and suggesting that
the balance is redressed that much more in the direction of a psychological
input (see also Berry 1984). Indeed we are confident that such new directions
(empirically and theoretically) will have important policy implications for
language planning and multiculturalism subsequently.
Finally, there are a number of areas worthy of immediate pursuance within
the context of the empirical development of research relating to ethnolinguistic identity theory. First, larger-scale studies which examine the interrelations
between identification, vitality, and group boundaries on the likelihood of
language maintenance on the one hand and ethnolinguistic assimilation on
the other are required in a diversity of multiethnic settings. Obviously, larger
samples of group members who vary widely in their identification with their
groups are required, with more detailed questionnaires designed. These could
include an examination of (1) Ss' social attributions (Hewstone and Jaspars
1984) relating to perceived relative vitality of ingroup-outgroup and the
degree to which the ingroup position is seen as reflecting group 'success/
failure', (2) perceptions of stability/legitimacy of the ingroup's position in
the status hierarchy and an analysis as to what dimensions constitute ethnic
threat/support, (3) the degree to which other groups with which the individual
identifies contribute to or detract from the core values of ethnic identity in
their self-concepts (see Wong-Reiger and Taylor 1981), and (4) the subjective
nature of the solidarity, ingroup, and societal norms presumed as operative
(see McKirnan and Hamayan 1984). It is also clearly important to move to
an examination of linguistic behaviors, ultimately in naturally occurring
situations so that 'ethnolinguistic differentiation' (not to mention ethnic
attenuation) can be spelled out in linguistic, nonverbal, and discourse, etc.,
detail in a sequential process fashion. An exploration of the ways in which
multiple (and sometimes, mixed) motives underlie speech strategies (see
Street and Cappella 1985) will doubtless uncover the contextual fact that
we may differentiate linguistically by means of certain linguistic features
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
94
H. Giles and P. Johnson
and tactics while perhaps simultaneously converging on other dimensions
(Coupland 1985). While we have emphasized ethnolinguistic identity theory
with respect to ethnic minorities in this paper, our ultimate goal (as can be
gleaned from Giles and Johnson 1981) is to consider dominant groups' language strategies in parallel also. For instance, it can often be in the interests
of such collectivities to control information flow and the subjective realities
of subordinate groups in a way that underscores the latter's low vitality, soft
boundaries, and legitimate low status.
While we do see the above multiple directions as priorities, we are also not
blind to the problematic nature of some of the assumptions underlying
ethnolinguistic identity theory, particularly with respect to its implications
for language maintenance and policy. The theoretical underpinnings of our
propositions rest in no small measure on a definition of social identity in
terms of social comparisons with salient outgroups deriving from Tajfel and
Turner's (1979) social identity theory; that is, social (and ethnic) identity has
been construed in terms of valued differences between the ingroup and
salient outgroups. We admit here that this theoretical basis is limited in its
conceptualization of identity construction and evaluation, and that alternative conceptualizations may be usefully incorporated into future social
psychological (as well as other) research into ethno- and sociolinguistics (see
Dryden and Cues 1986).
Our perspective has rested on what may be termed a competitive social
identity. This type may be characterized as differentiating self (or group)
from the field and considered in terms of the intellectual functions of separating and ordering, and the relationship styles of detachment and competition
(Williams 1984). The analysis of intergroup relations which has followed from
this conceptualization has made important contributions to the understanding
of social conflict and strategies which may be adopted for social change.
However, alternatives may be necessary in order to understand the ways in
which some groups exist in contact while maintaining positive identities
(Lambert et al. 1986).
One such alternative conceptualization may be defined in terms of valued
relationships with other groups, termed a communal social identity. It may
be characterized as merging self (or group) with the field and considered in
terms of the intellectual functions of unifying and communicating, and the
relationship styles of acceptance and cooperation (Williams 1984). An example
of the contrasts between competitive and communal social identities is
provided by Williams (1980):
Social workers can give meaning to their group by comparing themselves
with Clinical Psychologists and Health Visitors on valued dimensions. They
can also give meaning communally by stressing the valued aspects of their
relationship with another group, in this instance, the client group.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
95
It is likely that groups will differ in the potential they offer for the construction of favorable competitive and communal social identities. While there is
considerable evidence for the former (Tajfel 1978), there is less empirical
evidence relating to the latter (see however Williams 1984). It can be suggested
that this reflects in part the type of research which has been conducted,
where little opportunity may have been offered for subjects to define their
groups in terms of valued relationships with outgroups as well as or instead of
valued differences from them. It may also be that where there are wide
discrepancies in status between dominant and subordinate groups, positive
communal social identities are derived mainly from valued relationships
within the group.
In situations where subordinate groups have attained greater parity in
status and power with dominant groups, it can be proposed that harmonious
intergroup relations may be maintained when group members focus on both
valued differences and valued relationships between the groups. This notion
is akin to the ideology of 'equal but different' (Taylor and Simard 1975) or
'common humanity' (Fishman 1982) and can be applied to Smolicz's (1983)
discussion of pluralism. He suggests that stable pluralism may obtain when
ethnic group members maintain interaction with other members of their
ethnic group, thereby providing the necessary structural support for ethnicity.
At the same time, economic and civil relations are defined in terms of individual's personal attributes rather than their ethnic background. Hence, a
society which supports an ideology of cultural and social diversity encourages
the development of bicultural individuals who can participate in the activities
of more than one ethnic group while still maintaining their ethnic identity.
As indicated above, and by both ethnolinguistic identity theory and research on second-language learning (for example, Gardner 1985), the conditions fostering such pluralism (cultural amd linguistic) are likely to depend on
relative parity in status and power between the groups. In terms of our own
theoretical perspective, stable pluralism is likely to maintain when ethnic
group members identify relatively strongly with their ethnic group as well as
the society of which they are a part; perceive the norms and values of their
ethnic group to overlap with those of the society in significant ways; perceive
their ethnic boundaries to be hard and closed; and perceive the vitality of
their ethnic group to be relatively high. These conditions may be considered
to provide relatively stable and secure support for ethnicity, enabling constructive contact with ethnic outgroups (see for example Clement et al. 1977).
We argue here that in these circumstances, contact with outgroups is likely to
focus on valued aspects of the ethnic outgroups and valued relationships with
them and may be usefully conceptualized in terms of communal as well as
competitive social identities.
In conclusion, we have argued on the basis of exploratory data from Wales
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
96
H. Giles and P. Johnson
for a reformulated social psychological theory of some of the relationships
between language and ethnicity. This revised model begins to specify some of
the complex conditions under which ethnic minorities accentuate and attenuate their distinctive ethnolinguistic styles when interacting with an outgroup
speaker and has now been extended propositionally to take on board the
domain of language attitudes. This theory not only is a starting point for
considering the factors which promote and impede second-language acquisition but also specifies, we believe, some important psychological parameters
of language maintenance and erosion.
Department of Psychology
University of Bristol
References
Allard, R., and Landry, R. (1985). Subjective ethnolinguistic vitality viewed as a belief
system. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 7,1-12.
Ball, P., Cues, H., Byrne, J., and Berechree, P. (1984). Situational constraints on the
evaluative significance of speech accommodation: some Australian data. International
Journal of the Sociology of Language 46, 45-129.
- Giles, H., and Hewstone, M. (1984). The intergroup theory of second language acquisition with catastrophic dimensions. In The Social Dimensions, vol. 2, H. Tajfel (ed.),
668-694. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Banton, M. (1983). Racial and Ethnic Competition. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Beebe, L., and Giles, H. (1984). Speech accommodation theories: a discussion in terms
of second language acquisition. International Journal of the Sociology of Language
46, 5-32.
Berry, J. W. (1984). Multicultural policy in Canada: a social psychological analysis.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 16, 353-370.
Bourhis, R. Y. (1979). Language in ethnic interaction: a social psychological perspective.
In Language and Ethnic Relations, H. Giles and B. Saint-Jacques (eds.), 117-142.
Oxford: Pergamon.
— (I983a). Language attitudes and self-reports of French-English usage in Quebec. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 4,163-180.
-(ed.) (1983b). Conflict and'Language Planning in Quebec. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
- (1984). Cross-cultural communication in Montreal: two field studies since the Charter
of the French Language. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 46,
33-47.
- , Giles, H., Leyens, J. P., and Tajfel, H. (1979). Psycholinguistic distinctiveness: language divergence in Belgium. In Language and Social Psychology, H. Giles and
R. N. St Clair (eds.), 158-185. Oxford: Blackwell.
— , Giles, H., and Rosenthal, D. (1981). Notes on the construction of a 'subjective
vitality questionnaire' for ethnolinguistic groups. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 2,144-155.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
97
- , and Sachdev, I. (1984). Vitality perceptions and language attitudes: some Canadian
data. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 3, 97-126.
Clement, R., Gardner, R. C., and Smyth, P. C. (1977). Motivational variables in second
language acquisition: a study of Francophones learning English. Canadian Journal of
Behavioural Science 9,122-133.
Coupland, N. (1985). Hark, hark, the lark: social motivations for phonological styleshifting. Language and Communication 5, 151-171.
Denison, N. (1977). Language death or language suicide? International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 12,13-22.
Dry den, C., and Giles H. (1986). Language, social identity and health. In Psychology
Survey 6, H. Beloff and A. Coleman (eds.). Leicester: British Psychological Society
Press.
Eastman, C. M. (1979). Language resurrection. In Language and Ethnic Relations, H.
Cues and B. Saint-Jacques (eds.), 215-227. Oxford: Pergamon.
Edwards, J. R. (1985). Language, Society and Identity. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fishman, J. A. (1982). Whorfianism of the third kind. Language in Society 11,1-14.
Gal, S. (1979). Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Shift in Bilingual
Austria. New York: Academic Press.
Gallois, C., Callan, V. J., and Johnstone, M. (1984). Personality judgements of Australian
Aborigine and White speakers: ethnicity, sex and context. Journal of Language and
Social Psychology 3, 39-58.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning. London:
Edward Arnold.
Genesee, F., Rogers, P., and Holobow, N. (1983). The social psychology of second
language learning: another point of view. Language Learning 33, 209-224.
Giles, H. (1979). Ethnicity markers in speech. In Social Markers in Speech, K. R. Scherer
and H. Cues (eds.), 251-289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- (ed.) (1984). The dynamics of speech accommodation. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 46 (special issue).
- , Bourhis, R. Y., and Taylor, D. M. (1977). Towards a theory of language in ethnic
group relations. In Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations, H. Giles (ed.),
307-348. London: Academic Press.
- and Byrne, J. (1982). The intergroup model of second language acquisition. Journal
of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 3,17-40.
- , and Johnson, P. (1981). The role of language in ethnic group relations. In Intergroup
Behaviour, J. C. Turner and H. Cues (eds.), 199-243. Oxford: Blackwell.
- , and Johnson, P. (1986). Perceived threat, ethnic commitment, and inter-ethnic language behaviour. In Interethnic Communication: Recent Research, Y. Kim (ed.), 91116. 10th Intercultural Communication Annual. Beverly Hills: Sage.
- , Rosenthal, D., and Young, L. (1985). Perceived ethnolinguistic vitality: the Angloand Greek-Australian setting. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development
6, 256-269.
- , and Street, J. L., Jr. (1985). Communicator characteristics and behaviour: a review,
generalizations, and model. In The Handbook of Interpersonal Communication,
M. Knapp and G. Miller (eds.), 205-262. Beverly Hüls: Sage.
Harvey, J. H., and Smith, W. P. (1977). Social Psychology: An Attributional Approach.
St. Louis, Mo.: Mosby.
Hewstone, M., and Giles, H. (1986). Social groups and social stereotypes in intergroup
communication: a review and model of intergroup communication breakdown. In
Intergroup Communication, W. B. Gudykunst (ed.), 10-26. London: Arnold.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
98
H. Giles and P. Johnson
- , and Jaspars, J. (1984). Social dimensions of attributions. In The Social Dimensions,
vol. 2, H. Tajfel (ed.), 380-444. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hildebrandt, N., and Giles, H. (1983). The Japanese as subordinate group: ethnolinguistic identity theory in a foreign language context. Anthropological Linguistics 26,
436-466.
Huffines, L. M. (1986). Strategies of language maintenance and ethnic marking among
the Pennsylvanian Germans. Language Sciences 8,1-16.
Lambert, W. E., Mermigis, L., and Taylor, D. M. (1986). Greek Canadians' attitudes
toward own group and other Canadian ethnic groups: a test of the multiculturalism
hypothesis. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 18, 35-51.
Laporte, P. (1983). Status language planning in Quebec: an evaluation. In Conflict
and Language Planning in Quebec, R. Y. Bourhis (ed.), 53-80. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
McAllister, I., and Mughan, A. (1984). The fate of the language: determinants of bilingualism in Wales. Ethnic and Racial Studies 7, 321-341.
McKirnan, D. J., and Hamayan, E. V. (1984). Speech norms and attitudes towards
outgroup members: a test of a model in a bicultural context. Journal of Language
and Social Psychology 3, 21-38.
Milroy, L. (1982). Language and group identity. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 3, 207-216.
Oakes, P., and Turner, J. C. (1980). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour:
does minimal intergroup discrimination make social identity more positive? European Journal of Social Psychology 10, 295-301.
Ryan, E: B., Giles, H., and Sebastian, R. J. (Ϊ982). An integrative perspective for the
study of attitudes towards language variation. In Attitudes Towards Language Variation: Social and Applied Contexts, E. B. Ryan and H. Giles (eds.), 1-19. London:
Arnold.
— , Hewstone, M., and Giles, H. (1984). Language and intergroup attitudes. In Attitudinal Judgement, J. R. Eiser (ed.), 135-160. New York: Springer.
Saint-Blancat, C. (1985). The effect of minority group vitality upon its sociopsychological behaviour and strategies. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 6, 31-44.
Smolicz, J. J. (1983). Meaning and values in cross-cultural contexts. Ethnic and Racial
Studies 6, 33-49.
Street, J. L., Jr., and Cappella, J. N. (eds.) (1985). Sequence and Pattern in Communicative Behaviour. London: Arnold.
Sweeting, H. (1982). Aspects of psycholinguistic distinctiveness: a Scottish example.
Unpublished B.A. thesis, University of Edinburgh.
Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information 13, 65-93.
- (ed.) (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups. London: Academic Press.
— (ed.) (1982). Social Identity and Intergroup Behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- , and Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social
Psychology of Intergroup Relations, W. C. Austin and S. Worchel (eds.), 33-53.
Monterey: Brooks/Cole.
Taylor, D. M., Doria, J., and Tyler, J. K. (1983). Group performance and cohesiveness:
an attribution analysis. Journal of Social Psychology 119, 187-198.
- , and McKirnan, D. J. (1984). Afive-stagetheory of intergroup behaviour. British
Journal of Social Psychology 23, 291-300.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Ethnolinguistic identity theory
99
- , and Royer, L. (1980). Group processes affecting anticipated language choice in
intergroup relations. In Language: Social Psychological Perspectives, H. Giles, W. P.
Robinson, and P. M. Smith (eds.), 185-192. Oxford: Pergamon.
— , and Simard, L. (1975). Social interaction in a bilingual setting. Canadian Psychological Review 16, 240-254.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, Μ. Α., Turner, P. J., and Smith, P. M. (1984). Failure and defeat as
determinants of group cohesiveness. British Journal of Social Psychology 23, 97-111.
Williams, C. (1979). An ecological and behavioural analysis of ethnolinguistic change in
Wales. In Language and Ethnic Relations, H. Giles and B. Saint-Jacques (eds.), 2758. Oxford: Pergamon.
Williams, G. (ed.) (1978). Social and Cultural Change in Contemporary Wales. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Williams, J. A. (1980). Women and group identification: some implications for their
behaviour in the work force. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Social
Psychology, Canterbury.
- (1984). Gender and intergroup behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology 23,
311-316.
Wong-Reiger, D., and Taylor, D. M. (1981). Multiple group membership and self-identity.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 12, 61-79.
Young, L., Giles, H., and Pierson, H. (1986). Sociopolitical change and perceived vitality.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations 10, 459-469.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf
Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 12/5/13 11:24 AM