A study published in 2010 reported on past and current language use of a group of older Dutch migrants in New Zealand. Dutch migrants were chosen because the researcher was herself a bilingual Dutch–English-speaking migrant and hence in a good position to understand respondents’ background and assess their language use in both English and Dutch. Respondents interviewed for the study consisted of 30 retired Dutch migrants, all of whom had arrived in New Zealand between 1950 and 1965 when they were aged between 18 and 35 years. All respondents were living in the Greater Auckland area and were aged between 65 and 92 years at the time of the interview. All respondents were asked questions based on a sociolinguistic life questionnaire and asked about their language use and experiences since migration. Interviews were recorded, and information from interviews and questionnaires was supplemented by data collected from participants’ adult children. This article will focus on respondents’ comments in relation to their motivation to either maintain their first language (L1) Dutch or shift to their second language (L2) English in the home environment. It appears that external societal attitudes affected respondents’ language use in a number of domains.
AmmerlaanA. (1996). You get a bit Wobbly… Exploring bilingual retrieval processes in the context of first language attrition. Enschede, The Netherlands: CopyPrint2000.
2.
AppelR.MuyskenP. (1987). Language contact in bilingualism. New York, NY: Edward Arnold.
3.
Baetens BeardsmoreH. (2003) Who’s afraid of bilingualism? In DewaeleJ.M.HousenA.WeiL. (Eds.), Bilingualism: Beyond basic principles, pp. 10–27. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
4.
BialystokE. (2010). Global-local and trail-making tasks by monolingual and bilingual children: Beyond inhibition. Developmental Psychology, 46, 93–105.
5.
Bönisch-BrednichB. (2002). Keeping a Low Profile. An Oral History of German Immigration to New Zealand. Wellington, Victoria University Press.
6.
ClyneM. (1981). Second language attrition and first language reversion among elderly bilinguals in Australia. In MeidM.HellerK. (Eds.), Sprachkontakt als Ursache von Veränderungen der Sprach- und Bewusstseinsstruktur [Language contact as a cause of change in the structure of language and consciousness] (pp. 25–32). Innsbruck, Austria: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Innsbruck.
7.
CrezeeI. (2010). Investigating possible L2 attrition and L1 reversion in older migrants. Saarbrucken, Germany: VDM Verlag.
8.
De BotK. (2007). Dynamic systems theory, lifespan development and language attrition. In KöpkeB.SchmidM. S.KeijzerM.DostertS. (Eds.), Language attrition: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 53–68). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
9.
De JongL. (1980). Het koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Deel 10b. Het laatste jaar. [The Kingdom of the Netherlands in the Second World War. Volume 10, The last year, Pt. 2] The Hague, the Netherlands: Staatsdrukkerij.
EllisR. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
12.
FaseW.JaspaertK.KroonS. (1992). Maintenance and loss of minority languages. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
13.
FishmanJ. (1966). Language loyalty in the United States. The Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton.
14.
FishmanJ. (1991). Reversing language shift. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
15.
FishmanJ. (2001). Can threatened languages be saved?: Reversing language shift, revisited : a 21st century perspective. Clevedon, England:Multilingual Matters.
16.
HulsenM. (2000). Language loss and language processing: Three generations of Dutch migrants in New Zealand (PhD thesis). University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
17.
KingM. (2003). The penguin history of New Zealand. Auckland, New Zealand: Penguin Books.
18.
KöpkeB.SchmidM.KeijzerM.DostertS. (2007). Language attrition: Theoretical perspectives. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
19.
KuiperK. (2004). Etnografisch onderzoek en taalverschuiving: Nederlandse taalreservaten in Christchurch, Nieuw-Zeeland. [Ethnographic research and language shift: Dutch language reservations in Christchurch, New Zealand] Nederlandse Taalkunde, 9, 132–143.
20.
KuiperK.2005. Invisible immigrants, inaudible language: Nederlands en Nederlanders in Nieuw Zeeland. In AllanBellRayHarlowDonnaStarks (eds.) Languages of New Zealand. Wellington: Victoria University Press. 322–342.
21.
ParadisM. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam, the Netherlands and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
22.
PauwelsA. (1986). Immigrant dialects and language maintenance in Australia: The cases of the Limburg and Swabian dialects. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Foris.
23.
RobertsM. (1999). Language maintenance and shift in the Gujarati, Dutch and Samoan communities of Wellington (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
24.
SachtlebenCrezee (in press). Where are you from? Host expectations and migrant identity.
25.
SchmidM. (2004). A new blueprint for language attrition research. In SchmidM.KöpkeB.KeijzerM.WeilemarL. (Eds.), First language attrition (pp. 349–363). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
26.
SchoutenH. (1992). Tasman’s legacy: The New Zealand-Dutch connection. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand-Netherlands foundation.
27.
SeebusI. (2008). ‘Dinkum Dutch Aussies’: Language and identity among elderly Dutch-Australians (Unpublished PhD thesis). Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
28.
SmoliczJ. (1992). Minority languages as core values of ethnic cultures: A study of maintenance and erosion of Polish, Welsh and Chinese languages in Australia. In FaseW.JaspaertK.KroonS. (Eds.), Maintenance and loss of minority languages (pp. 227–305). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamin.
TaumoefolauM.StarksD.DavisK.BellA. (2002). Linguists and language maintenance: Pasifika language in Manukau, New Zealand. Oceanic Linguistics, 41, 15–27.
31.
VossesteinJ. (2005). Dealing with the Dutch. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen.
