Spanish Speakers in the USA

by Janet M. Fuller

Overview

Spanish Speakers in the USA explores the relationship between language and culture both as specific to Latin@s and as a generalizable example of linguistic and cultural diversity. The concept of identity is explored, with special attention to culturally embedded ideas about 'race' and ethnicity, and how language contributes to identity construction. Also addressed are attitudes and beliefs about the Spanish language, and the people who speak it, as they are revealed in online communication, public discourse, films and television. Linguistic consequences of language contact are discussed, showing how so-called 'Spanglish' is both socially significant and linguistically mundane. The final chapter illuminates how the education of Spanish speakers in the USA school system is linked to issues surrounding Latin@ identities and ideologies about Spanish.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781847698803
Publisher:	Channel View Publications
Publication date:	12/24/2012
Series:	MM Textbooks , #9
Sold by:	Barnes & Noble
Format:	eBook
Pages:	200
File size:	771 KB

About the Author

Janet M. Fuller is a Professor of Anthropology and the Director of the Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies program at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. She has done research on many facets of multilingualism, including the social identities and language use of children in Spanish-English bilingual classrooms in the USA.

Read an Excerpt

Spanish Speakers in the USA

---

By Janet M. Fuller

Multilingual Matters

Copyright © 2013 Janet M. Fuller
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-84769-880-3

---

CHAPTER 1

Language Ideologies and Language Policies

Language ideology defined

A framework for studying language ideologies

Normative monolingualism

English only

Monoglossic language ideologies

Ideologies about the value of Spanish

Mock Spanish

The status of English

Language policies, planning and practices

Language policy in the US

Bilingual education

Workplace practices and policies

Services in languages other than English

Discussion questions and activities

Recommended reading

Objectives: To understand the concept of language ideology and to examine how language ideologies are produced and reproduced through popular culture and public policies in the US.

I begin this chapter with a general discussion of the concept of language ideology and then present the theoretical framework which will be used to discuss language ideologies in this text. The next section deals with specific ideologies in the US: normative monolingualism (the idea that speaking only one language is the norm and that bilinguals should behave like monolingual speakers in each of their languages) and the low social value of Spanish. Then, a particular way of speaking – what has been called Mock Spanish – will be discussed as a representation of these ideologies, and contrasted in the next section with ideologies about the status of English. The last section of this chapter presents a brief overview of language policies and planning in the US that have grown up out of these dominant ideologies, including legislation on bilingual education, language in the workplace and services in languages other than English.

Language ideology defined

Language ideology is defined by Errington (2000) as ideas about language structure and use relative to social contexts. The concept of hegemony is an important one here. Much work on language ideologies is concerned with hegemonic discourses and their consequences. The basic concept is a simple one: the state of hegemony means that one entity (usually one social group) is dominant over another and this dominance is thought of as 'just the way it is'. With language ideologies, we are concerned with the dominance of certain ideas about language over others. The example we will use here (which will be developed throughout this chapter) is the hegemony of English (and English speakers) in the US, in particular with regard to dominance over Spanish (and Spanish speakers).

Hegemonic ideologies achieve their dominance through wide acceptance. Both the socially dominant and dominated groups in a society believe that these ideologies are natural and universal (Woolard, 1998). This means that the hegemonic ideology that mastery of English is more important than mastery of Spanish is accepted as true by not only most Anglophones but also by many heritage speakers of Spanish. This leads to lack of pride or even shame about speaking Spanish, and may also lead to parents not passing on their heritage language to their children because they believe it will hinder their ability to learn English and 'get ahead' in US society. (As will be discussed in Chapters 5 and 7, this is a pervasive but false assumption; research has shown that the loss of Spanish is actually detrimental to academic achievement and overall upward mobility.)

Although there are hegemonic language ideologies within any given society, there are also always competing ideologies. Along with an ideology of the dominance of English in the US there is a pluralist ideology which includes belief in the positive aspects of multilingualism. For example, UNESCO has proclaimed that February 21 is International Mother Language Day (see http://www.un.org/en/events/motherlanguageday) with the intent of promoting awareness and appreciation of language diversity; and eHow.com has a page which begins its pitch with:

There is nothing like being bilingual. If you speak only one language, you may not know what you are missing out on. Being bilingual opens up different pathways of thinking, of expression and of being. Bilingualism allows communication in unusual circumstances and with people who would normally be incommunicable due to a wall of misunderstanding. (eHow, n.d.)

This advertisement for bilingualism portrays some common ideas about language. Language is portrayed as part of a person's identity ('expression of being') and linked to culture ('different pathways of thinking'); languages are also social resources ('allows communication ...'). While these ideas about language are given a positive spin in this advertisement, it is easy to see how these same ideas might be twisted into something negative. In US society, monolinguals are envisioned as the ideal citizens (see the discussion of Theodore Roosevelt below). Bilingualism is not viewed as part of this ideal. Also, links to cultures which are not English-speaking can easily be seen as a deficit, instead of an asset, because this is seen as a lack of culture unity. Spanish is frequently depicted as the language of poor immigrants, gang members, etc. (see Chapter 4 for continued discussion of representations of Latin@s in the media). And while the language as a resource perspective can be a positive perspective on bilingualism, it can only overcome the negative perception of bilingualism if the particular language is seen as being useful – but what's the use of other languages if everyone speaks English, the way they should? Within the normative monolingualism ideology, none of these defenses of multilingualism carry much weight.

So, all ideologies are not equal and hegemonic ideologies are clearly more powerful. Many scholars of language ideologies (Gal, 1998; Kroskrity, 2004; Silverstein, 1996) demonstrate that even if an alternative ideology overtly challenges the hegemonic ideology, reference to the dominant ideology contributes to its hegemony. As we have seen, this is the case with the hegemony of English; it is difficult to discuss the value of other languages or linguistic pluralism without recognizing that the perceived mainstream norm is monolingualism in English.

Research on hegemonic ideologies addresses how they are part of the production and reproduction of social inequality. The phrase 'production and reproduction' is often used in discussions of ideologies to convey the idea that linguistic and social practices do not merely reflect social norms but also perpetuate and shape them. To give a simple example, a t-shirt depicting a stylized Uncle Sam with the caption 'I want you to speak English or get out!' not only reflects the idea that English is the only appropriate language in the US, but encourages the symbolic association between speaking English and being an American. It represents the views of the wearer as part of already existing social norms and simultaneously seeks to influence the behavior and views of others.

We talk about this in terms of 'social inequality' as a way of recognizing that there are always dominant and dominated groups. The members of these groups do not have equalopportunities because they are thought of as being different and considered deficient in some way(s). In terms of language ideologies, this means that non-'native' speakers of English often do not have the same opportunities in education, employment, housing, etc. as 'native' speakers of English (especially speakers of what are considered standard varieties of English). For example, the belief that second language speakers of English are difficult to understand may lead to individuals who speak English non-'natively' not being hired for a job or promoted, even if there is no evidence that their English is not comprehensible. Acting on such beliefs is the perpetuation of inequality.

Work on language ideologies and social inequality relies on Bourdieu's discussion of symbolic power and symbolic domination (Bourdieu, 1991). Symbolic value is achieved within what Bourdieu terms a 'linguistic community', traditionally defined as a 'group of people who use the same system of linguistic signs, the minimum of communication which is the precondition for economic production and even for symbolic domination' (Bourdieu, 1991: 45). Bourdieu stresses that the domination of one variety rests on the complicity of speakers of other varieties; as discussed above, this is often the case even when minority language speakers are negatively impacted by the dominance of the majority language.

The domination of an official language – or of a de facto national language in the case of English in the US – has its source in political authority, but the relationship between language and authority is circular. Once endorsed by educators, politicians and the media the national/official language may lend authority to those who speak it and those who are considered experts in it (e.g. educators, authors of dictionaries, national language societies). For example, (standard) English in the US has gained authority due to the practice of using it as the language of education and government, which in turn means that speaking (standard) English grants individuals authority they would not have in another language. Because (standard) English is used by people with power, it is then considered a powerful way of speaking, and so the cycle continues.

The following sections will discuss specific language ideologies found in the US. Evidence for language ideologies can be found in many venues; here, I will discuss how ideologies are apparent in public texts of different types. However, it is important to note that hegemonic ideologies are often not stated explicitly, as they are naturalized to an extent that they are taken for granted (Kroskrity, 1998). The concept of naturalization implies that an idea is not recognized as a cultural value but is seen as an inevitable truth or something inherent to the human experience. The dominance of English in the US has been naturalized; such products as the bumper sticker in Figure 1.1 ('Welcome to America: NOW SPEAK ENGLISH!') illustrate how this dominance is often viewed as something which needs no explanation. Yet despite naturalization, it is possible to find evidence of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic ideologies in the discussions and comments made in public forums such as blogs, chat rooms, social networking sites, etc. Before moving on to these public displays of ideology, however, I will next outline a theoretical framework for analyzing ideologies.

A framework for studying language ideologies

A framework for looking at language ideologies has been presented in research by Gal and Irvine (1995). This approach consists of the application of three concepts to ideological systems: iconicity, recursiveness and erasure.

Iconicity means that a language comes to be not only an index of a certain group, but an icon for the group; that is, it does not merely 'point to' the social group, but is assumed to be a representation of that group, sharing characteristics with it. Taking the case of Spanish in the US, we find that Spanish has become an icon for Latin@s, and there is a sense that the speakers and language share characteristics. The Spanish language is commonly viewed as 'easy' (Lipski, 2002: 1248), which fits with the common perception of its speakers as being simple rural folk. Spanish is seen as linguistically inferior to English; as will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter, use of Mock Spanish (e.g. 'no problemo', 'el cheapo') illustrate the attitude that Spanish is simply English with –o endings on nouns, and not a 'real' language (Barrett, 2006; Hill, 1995, 1998, 2005, 2008). It follows that speakers of Spanish are also inferior to English speakers – hence the common depiction of Mexicans (the prototypical Latin@) as stupid, lazy, sexually promiscuous and dirty (there's a fine example of this attitude in a discussion titled 'Mexicans are stupid' on potatoe.com, n.d.)

Finally, Spanish does not belong in the US, where English is regarded as the only legitimate language, and its speakers are equally unwanted and are not seen as legitimate Americans. All of these stereotypical attitudes reflect an iconic relationship between Spanish in the US and Latin@s.

Recursiveness means that a certain type of relationship (between social groups or languages) repeats itself on different levels in society. In this case, the relationship is one of hierarchy and dominance. Recursiveness in US language ideology can be found in the pervasive idea that certain ways of speaking are superior to others, and there is one 'right' way to speak a language. There is a hierarchy of languages, English being superior to Spanish (and other foreign languages), and there is also a hierarchy of dialects of American English – varieties associated with the educated middle class, or those varieties sometimes referred to as 'White' ways of speaking, are perceived as being at the top, and ethnic dialects (such as African American Vernacular English (AAVE) or Chican@ English) and non-standard dialects associated with poor, rural and uneducated people are at the bottom. This is also applied to other languages such as Spanish; US varieties are deemed inferior to standard Latin American varieties and Castilian Spanish (see Anzaldúa, 1999: 80 for a discussion of this for Chican@ Spanish, and Toribio, 2006 for a similar discussion of Dominican Spanish).

So the perspective of the existence of one 'correct' way of speaking and multiple inferior ways of speaking is seen on both the level of language (e.g. English over Spanish) as well as on the level of dialect (e.g. standard English over Chican@ English, standard Spanish over Chican@ Spanish). We also see recursiveness in the application of this hierarchy to the social groups connected to these particular language varieties; the speakers of particular high-ranked languages (i.e. speakers of standard English) have a higher social rank than those who speak stigmatized languages (e.g. speakers of Chican@ English or Spanish). Of course, social groups are not judged only in terms of the languages they speak. There are also other issues – most prominently 'race' and ethnicity, to be discussed in Chapter 3 – which are intertwined with minority language and dialect groups. As we will see, the principle of recursiveness of relationships between groups is maintained regardless of how these groups are defined.

There is also recursiveness in popular ideas about the nature of language. Linguistic varieties (and especially prestigious ones) are usually perceived as being uniform or homogeneous; in reality, all 'languages' consist of many different varieties, usually called 'dialects' (Lippi-Green, 1997). In the context of discourse on bilingualism, English is presented as a uniform entity which is contrasted with Spanish, Chinese, Polish, Hmong, etc., which are all also seen as homogeneous. The parallel conceptualization is that the speakers of these languages also form homogeneous groups. All English speakers are superior, all Spanish speakers are poor, all Chinese speakers are industrious, and so forth. One piece of evidence of this view of language and language group as monolithic is the common reference to any Spanish speaker as 'Mexican'. This usage indicates a lack of understanding of differences between nationality and language (an idea which will be re-visited shortly) but also a lack of awareness about the variation within the category of Spanish speakers (i.e. not everyone who speaks Spanish is from Mexico). This is the recursive theme; both languages and the groups of people who speak them are framed as homogeneous entities, as if there were no different ways of speaking Spanish (or English), and a myriad of different national, cultural, ethnic, etc. ways of being a US Latin@.

Finally, erasure is the phenomenon of ignoring or rendering invisible any practices which would contradict the hegemonic ideology. The ideology of normative monolingualism in the US dictates that having one sole language within a national territory is the natural and 'right' way for a country to operate, and that multilingualism is a feature of poor immigrant communities which are separate from 'mainstream' America. In order for this ideology to stand, several sociolinguistic realities must undergo erasure. Middle class multilinguals, the success of bilingual education programs, and the existence of many multilingual nations must be ignored or refuted – or, at the minimum, portrayed as exceptions to the rule. In addition, selective erasure of many aspects of the linguistic history of the US must also take place, in which the multilingual nature of early settlements and maintenance of immigrant languages other than English are forgotten – along with the fact that English itself was a poor immigrant language when it arrived in what is now the US. In Figure 1.2, we see a bumper sticker which challenges the erasure of this history by playing on the slogan of the bumper sticker in Figure 1.1. Like most challenges to hegemonic ideologies, it necessarily establishes the hegemonic ideology as widespread while at the same time seeking to discredit it.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Spanish Speakers in the USA by Janet M. Fuller. Copyright © 2013 Janet M. Fuller. Excerpted by permission of Multilingual Matters.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements 
Introduction 
PART I: IDEOLOGIES AND IDENTITIES 
Chapter One: Language Ideologies and Language Policies 
Chapter Two: Language and Identity 
Chapter Three: “Race”, Ethnicity and the Language of Latinos in the US 
Chapter Four: Media Representations of Spanish and Spanish Speakers in US English Language TV and Film: Production and Reproduction of Ideologies 
Part II: LANGUAGE PRACTICES 
Chapter Five: Spanish Language Maintenance and Shift in the US 
Chapter Six: Linguistic Consequences of Spanish-English Bilingualism in the US: Spanglish and Chican@ English 
Chapter Seven: Latin@ Education in the US 
Glossary 
Index