See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351354420

THE ROLE OF PARENTS IN HERITAGE LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE IN

MALAYSIA

Conference Paper · March 2020

CITATIONS READS

0 469

2 authors:

Ezzah Syarina Binti Zamri Nurshahirah Azman

1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS
UNISEL | Universiti Selangor
3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nurshahirah Azman on 06 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THE ROLE OF PARENTS IN HERITAGE LANGUAGE
MAINTENANCE IN MALAYSIA

Ezzah Syarina binti Zamri1, Nurshahirah binti Azman2

1
Academy of Language Studies (APB), Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Selangor
2
Centre for Foundation and General Studies, Universiti Selangor, Bestari Jaya, Selangor.

Email: [email protected], [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Many multicultural families in Malaysia struggle with the maintenance of their heritage language,
especially if both of the parents are of different cultural backgrounds and the children have started
school in a dominant society, which means that the children may not even be using their home
language outside the family setting. Studies revealed that parents with heritage languages valued its
maintenance very much, desiring their children to maintain it as well of which then calls for the role
of the parents itself in the process of language maintenance. Although several studies have been
conducted on heritage language maintenance in Malaysia, the role of the parents in the family should
be further explored. This study aims to explore the extent of heritage language practice in
multicultural family interaction, the role these parents play in the process as well as to investigate the
families’ attitudes towards their heritage language. This study employs a field research, involving 6
bilingual/multilingual aboriginal families in Janda Baik, Pahang. The family’s interaction during
mealtime is recorded, followed by ethnographic observations and semi-structured interviews with the
parents and children. This paper provides insights on the importance of the parents’ role in the
maintenance of heritage language. Despite its focus on parents’ role, this paper also raises the needs
for the members of society to acknowledge the societal role in expanding the mutual use of heritage
language and laying out spaces for its surfacing. It also recommends the government and schools to
design curriculum and programmes attuned to the knowledge about heritage language speakers’ local
society, involving the parents to amplify their roles as heritage language gatekeepers.

Keywords: heritage language, multicultural family, bilingual/multilingual, language maintenance

INTRODUCTION

Language maintenance explains connection between constancy and change in habitual

language use in terms of social interaction, as well as cultural processes. This occurs especially when
different populations interact with each other. According to Dweik (2014), there are three elements to
be considered when it comes to language maintenance which includes the habitual language used in
most of the time, the stability of habitual language in different group and the attitude towards
language in interaction. Redemann (2018) also mentioned, in order to maintain a language, the
responsibilities apart from education, community, and businesses, family is also important and play a
huge role to ensure the language is not in danger. Considering the most important domain in language
maintenance, family hold the main responsibility because they play a critical role in building their
child’s linguistic environment.

Globally speaking, language endangerment happens in every part of the world as there are
minorities among the majorities which influences the language maintenance process. Fishman in 1985
conducted a study specifically in the USA which attempted to recognize factors of continued
existence among minorities which are non-English mother tongue. Similar thing is also a concern in
Malaysia, with various ethnic groups living and assimilating with the dominant culture and language
especially due to interracial marriages.

801
 It is important to note that heritage language maintenance requires a persistent concern
especially within the family itself. Parents here are the main domain for heritage language use. Any
other domain like education and some other supportive policies will only value if the parents initiate
their own mother tongue and provide practice grounds for the language’s continuity. Kheirkah (2015)
in her study which narrowly investigated interactions in a Persian-Kurdish family residing in Sweden
found that there are three parental ideologies which will impact a multilingual family’s interaction,
which is also based on the model developed by De Houwer (1999) and found in King and Fogle
(2013). The three ideologies include parents needing to have clear ideas on which language should be
used with their children, the attitudes of parents towards the learning process, and the concern of
parents on which language need to be used on which types of interaction. This will later serve as the
current study’s conceptual framework.

Multilingual Family’s
Linguistic Practices

Parental Ideologies

1. Language to use 2. Attitude Towards Type of 3. Attitude Towards

Interaction Children’s Language Learning
Parents must have clear
ideas about which Parents should have good Parents’ attitudes towards
languages should be used attitudes concerning particular language learning and
with their children. types of interactions, such as bilingualism in influencing
mixing or use of slang their interactional strategies

Children’s Language
Outcome

Heritage Language
Maintenance Outcome

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework – Three Parental Ideologies in Maintaining Heritage

Language Among Their Children

There are huge numbers of studies on heritage language maintenance. However, most of the
studies focused on other domains than a family domain. For example, Gkaintartzi (2016) studies on
heritage language maintenance but in aspect of education in Greek. Also, most of the existing studies
only emphasised on immigrant families to that particular country but not on their own minorities’
community which might as well experience the language endangerment. For example, (Dweik, 2014)
only focused on language maintenance of the migrate Arab in Vancouver, Canada. The result shows a
very positive outcome where they are proudly using Arabic because it is also used in religion matters.

802
However, this paper managed to pull some factors that maintain the language which is the strategies
used by the parents in order to maintain their languages especially to their generation who was born in
Canada.

In Malaysia, studies on heritage language maintenance focused mostly on Chinese

communities, for example, Hakka and Hokkien languages. Even in very recent studies by Sim (2017),
only focused on how to promote these heritage languages in terms of businesses. Dani (2019)
emphasised on the indigenous Dusun society in Sabah, but it only focused on the education domain,
not the role of the parents. The role of family especially parents in order to maintain language remain
unexplored though parents is the main key to maintain the language (Tannenbaum, 2016). Hence, this
paper aims to shed light on the role of family to maintain the indigenous language focusing on the
indigenous ethnic groups of Semai and Temuan in Janda Baik, Pahang. This study will examine to
what extent the parents employs their heritage language in family interaction as well as the attitude of
the parents in using the heritage language in family interaction. It is hoped that this study could
develop an understanding of the importance of language maintenance especially in Malaysia which is
comprised of various ethnic groups, referring to the minorities. This study will also benefit the
practitioners on how to play their role as well as contribute to the agencies in government, the
language policy planners and researchers in this field.

Methodology
This study implements qualitative analysis as the design. The respondents involved in this study are
the indigenous families located in Kg. Janda Baik, Pahang. Three couples which from interracial
marriages were chosen as participants to this study. Each of the three couples got married to different
indigenous people from another state who speaks a different language than theirs. The languages are
Temuan, Temiar and Semai.

Table 1: Demographic Profile

Participants Name/Age Language Origin

M: Ali (36 y/o) M: Semai M: Raub, Pahang
Couple A
F: Suwilan (33y/0) F: Temuan F: Janda Baik, Pahang
M: Anis (31y/o) M: Temuan M: Janda Baik, Pahang
Couple B
F: Yusop (35y/o) F: Semai F: Raub, Pahang
M: Jaringgo
M: Temiar M: Kelantan
Couple C (37y/o)
F: Temuan F: Janda Baik, Pahang
F: Zaiga (34y/o)

This study interviewed the couples to reach the research purposes. Researchers adapted
questions from Dweik (2014) which consist of two different categories which are the language used at
home and attitudes towards language. The interview session was recorded and being transcribed
after. Next, by using the transcript, line-by-line coding process was done to merge the information in
order to answer the research question. After that, it continues with the cross-case analysis process. All
themes were formed within this process and this study manage to extract three different themes. The
data next being analysed and compared.

Results and Discussion

This study has chosen 3 married couples with children, where each parent has his/her own indigenous
heritage language. This section analyses these couples’ choice of language practice and their attitudes
based on the three parents’ ideologies on heritage language maintenance, which are also the themes
used in discussion.

Language practice in multilingual family interaction

803
All of the couples involved in this study stated that since they are living in Kampung Orang Asli
Chemperoh, Janda Baik, Pahang, the main language they will use in everyday interaction would be
Temuan which is an Austronesian language. This language is very closely related and similar to the
Malay language. For the spouses that are not from the Temuan ethnic group, they are mostly able to
communicate in the Temuan language itself.

It was found that all parents have clear ideas on which language to use with children, and on
what occasion. This fulfils the first parental ideology. All couples mentioned that Temuan is their
main language choice despite having a parent speaking another heritage language (Semai or Temiar).
For Couple A, they stated that they would mainly use Temuan language:

“(We speak) the Temuan language, because we’ve been living here for quite a while.
The Semai language is not spoken.” - (Couple A, line 11-13)

With further questions, Couple A, the husband mentioned that he did not use the Semai
language with his children, but will use Temuan instead, of which he can speak very well too. This
could be influenced by the fact that they are living in an area in which the dominant language used is
the Temuan language. This is the same case Couple B, Jaringgo and Zaiga who are both Temiar and
Temuan people respectively. They would use Temuan language with their children most of the time.
The difference between them and the previously mentioned Couple A (Suwilan & Ali) is that their
eldest child of age 10 can speak the father’s heritage language, Temiar. Couple B also revealed their
flexibility in using which language in their daily interaction which is also based on practicality and
needs:

“I will use either language that is quick. If I want to scold, or ask them to eat, I will
use whichever language that is quicker and easy.” – (Couple B, line 38-39)

Couple C, on the other hand, stated that while their family would mainly speak in Temuan,
his son would switch to Temiar when talking with him.

“My eldest son understands the Temiar language. (They) can talk in Temiar
language.” – (Couple C, line 90)

This brings to the need to discuss about the reason why some of these children can speak the
heritage language of the parent who is not from the dominant ethnic group Temuan in the Kampung
Orang Asli.

“My son said, if I don’t learn the (Semai) language…when I meet the relatives and
they talk to me, how can I reply them.” - (Couple B, line 66-68)

“It wasn’t his father who taught him much, but because he heard…his cousins and
nephews speaking in Temiar,
so he followed suit.” – (Couple C, line 106-107)

It was found that according to Couple C, Jaringgo & Zaiga (Temiar & Temuan), their eldest son
can speak the Temiar language due to the son’s own curiosity. This is in accordance with the situation
in Couple B, Yusop & Anis (Temuan & Semai) whose children can speak both languages in their
everyday interaction because the children feels shame if he cannot speak in Semai. It is apparent that
the children of Couple B and Couple C have developed their own motivation and interest to speak the
heritage language of their other parent, and this leads to the role of family in deciding which language
to use on what occasion and purposes. An interesting response was provided by Couple C, Jaringgo
and Zaiga about the purpose of using a particular heritage language. Jaringgo (Temiar) stated that
when going out to the grocery store with his eldest son, he would use the Temiar language. He said:

804
 “If we go to the stores, or anywhere, I will use Temiar so that nobody would confuse if
I were talking to other parents’ child.” – (Couple C, line 107-108)

This is a perfect example of when a parent knows the purpose to use which language on which
occasion. Based on Jaringgo’s response, aside from wanting to establish emotional attachments to the
heritage language, he wants to avoid confusion to the other indigenous people in his place and use the
Temiar language as a sign that he is talking to his son, not other parents’ child.

Family Attitudes towards Their Heritage Language

It was found that these families have positive and supportive attitude towards the types of their
children’s interation, which is related to the second parental ideology. In maintaining the heritage
language of an ethnic group, parents are required to have a positive attitude towards the interaction
their children are having at home. This includes their reactions towards the mixing of languages or use
of slangs in that heritage language by their children. As proposed by Pitton (2013), the maintenance of
language is by combining more than one languages in daily life. While Couple A, Ali and Suwilan
(Semai & Temuan) did not express much on the usage of the less dominant Semai language in their
family, Couple B, Anis and Yusop (Temuan & Semai) and Couple C, Jaringgo and Zaiga (Temiar &
Temuan) displayed positive attitudes towards how their children interact in both languages. These are
the response when asked whether any of them insisted on their children a particular language to use
when interacting:

“(both languages) are important. We can’t exclude any, they’re both inseparable.” –
(Couple B, line 64-65)

“No, it depends on the kids, which language they want to use (Temiar atau Temuan)”
– (Couple C, line 114-115)

Couple B, Yusop and Anis (Temuan & Semai) expressed an encouraging attitude towards their
children’s tendency to mix both languages in their everyday interaction. They stated that their kids
love to mix the languages among siblings. When asked what they think of when their children mix
both Temuan and Semai in their conversation, Yusop and Anis mentioned that it all depends on their
children and they also do not mind. However, Anis emphasised that while she does not mind her
children’s language choice, she stressed that both languages are important.

On the other hand, Couple C, Jaringgo, the husband added that he does not mind if his children
wanted to use Temuan more than his own heritage language, Temiar. He admits, while both is
important, it depends on his kids’ choice. Jaringgo’s action, reaction and decision may be explained
by the affective reason, where he accommodates to his children’s choice of language instead of
insisting on his heritage language (Temiar). This allows him to have a parallel mode of interaction
where he would speak his heritage language while his children use their preferred language
(Kheirkhah & Cekaite, 2015) This further explains why among the couples, the Yusop and Anis
couple have children who could speak in both their parents’ heritage languages. Their parents
expressed supportive yet firm attitude towards the heritage language they both speak respectively.
From this point, we could see that these parents provided the suitable atmosphere of learning where
they do not explicitly constraint the child’s use of another language. Curdt-Christiansen (2016) also
mentioned that in a minority language maintenance, it is important for parents to provide the
appropriate condition and environment so that their children can practice the language.

These parents are also found to be very supportive towards their children’s language learning,
which fulfils the third parental ideology. In strategizing the interaction with children for the
maintenance of heritage language, parents must possess the correct attitude towards their children’s
bilingualism and language learning.

“…because my children like to ask questions…they will ask ‘Mak, how to say eat in
Semai?’ I will reply ‘Eat is cecak’ like that…” – (Couple B, line 46-47)

805
 “I am happy when my eldest son can speak Temiar. But sometimes when he tried, he
is scared that others will laugh at him.” - (Couple C, line 129-130)

To start with, Couple A, Ali & Suwilan (Semai & Temuan) expressed no objections towards
their children who can speak in both Semai and Temuan, as well as Malay. Couple B, Yusop and Anis
(Temuan & Semai) displayed very encouraging attitude in this aspect. As a stay-at-home mother, Anis
whose Semai language being the less dominant language in the Kampung Orang Asli spends her days
at home teaching her children whenever they ask about the Semai language. Anis agreed that her
children could speak the Semai language due to her own effort in teaching.

Couple C, Jaringgo and Zaiga (Temiar & Temuan) are also very supportive of their children
wanting to learn and speak Temiar even though that language is not used in the Kampung Orang Asli
Chemperoh, Janda Baik. Jaringgo and Zaiga’s eldest son can speak Temiar due to his own curiosity,
and has since used Temiar whenever he is speaking with Jaringgo, the father. Jaringgo further
expressed that he acknowledges his son’s fear in using that language, so he said each time his son
expresses his uncertainty, Jaringgo would reassure him and encourages him to learn even more.

We can see that both Couple B, Yusop and Anis (Temuan & Semai) and couple C, Jaringgo
and Zaiga (Temiar & Temuan) holds similar belief that their children’s bilingualism is something to
be encouraged. This is in contrast with what indigenous Ecuadorian parents believe, as they stated that
exposing second language too early would cause confusion, so they promoted Spanish and shifted
away from their indigenous language (King and Fogle, 2013). Despite the logic in these indigenous
Ecuadorian parents’ statement, we can still agree with our participants’ decision to be very open and
supportive of their children learning the other heritage language. When asked whether their heritage
language will survive or not in the future, all the three couples confidently responded it will survive.

“(our language) will not disappear, because that is our origin and we still speak
it…” – (Couple A, line 34-35)

“it won’t extinct. Our kids still speak both languages.” – (Couple B, line 80)

“No, this language is still strong.” – (Couple C, line 139)

From the responses, we can relate it with how encouraging these parents are with their
children bilingualism. To them, exposing their children with another language at a young age would
actually help them to maintain and preserve the heritage language even more. This explains their
confidence that their language will always survive. Such positive perception towards bilingualism
could actually be an impact of these parents’ personal experiences in learning the language where they
might have been taught just like that by their own parents, as well as seeing this action as being the
good parents (Curdt-Christiansen, 2016).

CONCLUSION

The current study suggests that in a multilingual indigenous family, parents play a major and crucial
role in maintaining their heritage language. Despite each parent having their own heritage language, it
is not impossible to have their children practice both languages in their daily interaction, hence
maintaining the language. If these heritage languages are to be transmitted to the upcoming generation
to ensure its survival, it is important for the language user itself to have the appropriate perceptions
and attitudes towards the language (Ding, 2016). This is shown in this present study by some of the
participants who succeeded in making their children speak both heritage languages by actually
practicing the heritage language itself with the children (completely or partially) and having
encouraging and positive attitude towards the children’s interaction. This leads to them
accommodating to the children’s needs to mix and switch codes, as well as supporting the learning of
the language itself along with the children’s own interest and initiatives.

806
 Several limitations should be noted for this present study. First, the present study had only
involved the indigenous ethnic group from one geographical area, which is from the Kampung Orang
Asli Chemperoh, Janda Baik, Pahang. Second, it had also only collected the data from the parents
without involving the children. Third, the duration of the conduct of the study was limited, slightly
hindering the ability to measure change and ability within the chosen sample.

For future research, it is suggested that the study would involve more indigenous ethnic group
from several other states in Malaysia to see whether the pattern persists or differs. It would also be
interesting if future study could include the children as part of the participants to gain insight on their
perceptions. An ethnographic study can also be done to observe closely these sample’s daily
interaction. Lastly, a longer duration of time for the study is recommended so that researchers could
measure any changes and ability among the sample that has been chosen.

References

Curdt-Christiansen, X. L. (2016). Conflicting language ideologies and contradictory language

practices in Singaporean multilingual families. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development, 37(7), 694-709.

Dani, N. A., Kiram, N. M., Arif, M., Ariffin, M., Ombi, K., Suhailin, R.,... & Paul, D. (2019).
Endangered Intergenerational Language Transmission: Evidence from the Indigenous Dusun
Society of Sabah, Malaysia. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 27(1).

De Houwer, A. (1999). Environmental Factors in Early Bilingual Development: The Role of Parental
Beliefs and Attitudes. Bilingualism and Migration, ed. By Guus Extra and Ludo Verhoeven, 75-
96. New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.

Ding, S. L. (2016). The role of parents in heritage language maintenance in Malaysia. Malaysian
Journal of Chinese Studies, 5(1), 15-27.

Dweik, B. S., Nofal, M. Y., & Qawasmeh, R. S. (2014). Language use and language attitudes among
the Muslim Arabs of Vancouver/Canada: A sociolinguistic study. International Journal of
Linguistics and Communication, 2(2), 75-99.

Gkaintartzi, A., Kiliari, A., & Tsokalidou, R. (2016). Heritage language maintenance and education in
the Greek sociolinguistic context: Albanian immigrant parents’ views. Cogent Education, 3(1),
1155259.

Hua, Z., & Wei, L. (2016). Transnational experience, aspiration and family language policy. Journal
of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 37(7), 655-666.

Kheirkhah, M., & Cekaite, A. (2015). Language maintenance in a multilingual family: Informal
heritage language lessons in parent–child interactions. Multilingua 2015, 34(3), 319-346.

King, K. A. (2013). A tale of three sisters: Language ideologies, identities, and negotiations in a
bilingual, transnational family. International Multilingual Research Journal, 7(1), 49-65.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2013.746800

King, K. A., Fogle, L., & Logan-Terry, A. (2008). Family Language Policy. Language and
Linguistics Compass, 2(5), 907–922. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818x.2008.00076.x

Lanza, E., & Wei, L. (2016). Multilingual encounters in transcultural families. Journal of Multilingual
and Multicultural Development, 37(7), 653-654.

807
 Redemann, A. (2018). Strategies Teachers And Families Can Use To Support Home Language
Maintenance For Early Elementary Students. School Of Education Student Capstone Projects.
Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/hse_cp/213/

Sim, N. B., & Heng, C. S. (2017). Promoting Hokien Dialect At The Workplace: A Survey On Non-
Chinese Communities In Peninsular Malaysia. Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 15, 1-5.

Tannenbaum, M., & Yitzhaki, D. (2016). ‘Everything comes with a price…’; family language policy
in Israeli Arab families in mixed cities. Language and Intercultural Communication, 16(4),
570-587.

Wang, X. (2016). Language maintenance or language shift? The role of religion in a Hakka Catholic
community in Malaysia. International Multilingual Research Journal, 10(4), 273-288.

808

View publication stats