Parental Attitudes and Practices in Heritage Language Socialisation: Maintaining Spanish and Portuguese in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of a heritage language (HL) at home has been seen as one of the most influential factors in determining its maintenance and is highly shaped by the attitudes parents have towards their language. These parental attitudes thus play a significant role in children's HL socialisation, particularly in environments in which the HL is in competition with multiple minority and/or majority languages, as is the case in many areas of Canada with the two Official Languages (OLs), French and English. In such environments, HL maintenance is not only influenced by the parental attitudes towards the HL itself, but also towards the OLs. Parental attitudes, the language(s) of schooling and overall exposure to each language all play a role in determining if the child will grow up to be monolingual, bilingual, or multilingual. This exploratory study aimed to identify the attitudes of Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking parents towards maintaining these HLs in Canada and their children’s language development in their HLs alongside French and English. It also aimed to explore how these attitudes influence their practices with respect to their children’s language socialisation, specifically their family language practices and the language(s) of schooling in which they choose to enrol their children, adding to this area of study that currently lacks descriptive research. Both the qualitative and quantitative results showed that the 315 parent participants generally had positive or very positive attitudes towards their HL and its maintenance in Canada, showing a high desire for their children to develop bilingually or multilingually in their HL and one or both of the OLs. These attitudes supported the family use patterns, with many parents reporting a high use of their HL at home, including those in linguistically intermarried families. Their positive attitudes towards both OLs and a generally high desire for bilingual or multilingual education were supported by the choices they made, when possible, in the language(s) of education of their children. The lack of quality and/or accessible options was noted by many and shows a growing need for more educational offerings in these two HLs. The results may be used in determining best practices for the transmission and maintenance of Spanish and Portuguese in a linguistically-diverse Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".