Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Aims and Objectives/Purpose/Research Questions:

This study investigates intergenerational perspectives and strategies for heritage language maintenance (HLM) among immigrant families residing in Southern California. It aims to understand how families from Hebrew-, Tagalog-, Korean-, Spanish-, and Mandarin-speaking backgrounds perceive the societal value of their heritage languages (HLs), how personal pride informs language use, and what strategies are employed across generations. The research addresses (a) perceived societal valuation vs. personal pride in heritage languages; (b) discrepancies in reported language use between parents and children; and (c) generational preferences in HLM strategies.

Design/Methodology/Approach:

Using a cross-sectional quantitative survey design, data were collected across three studies using a shared methodological framework grounded in Family Language Policy and sociocultural theory. The survey examined perceptions, home language use, and HLM strategies.

Data and Analysis:

The study includes 143 immigrant parents and 129 U.S.-born adult children. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, and Pearson correlations to compare across language groups and examine relationships between parental practices and children’s HL proficiency.

Findings/Conclusions:

Results reveal strong heritage language pride across generations despite variability in perceived societal support. Parents reported more frequent HL use than children perceived, indicating a potential gap in mutual understanding. Digital media emerged as the most widely used HLM strategy, while children favored multifaceted approaches, including entertainment and cultural activities. Correlations show that parental pride and consistent HL use are positively associated with children’s self-rated proficiency.

Originality:

This study uniquely integrates perspectives from five language communities to highlight intergenerational alignment and divergence in HLM practices, revealing nuanced dynamics often overlooked in single-language research.

Significance/Implications:

Findings emphasize the need for dialogic, child-inclusive family language planning and culturally responsive community support. The research offers practical insights for educators and families working within comparable immigrant contexts to support HL use across generations.

Keywords

Heritage language maintenance parental language strategies translanguaging practices immigrant families bilingual identity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adamuti-Trache

(2012). Language acquisition among adult immigrants in Canada: The effect of premigration language capital. Adult Education Quarterly, 63(2), 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713612442804

Alsahafi

(2019). Language maintenance and heritage language education: The case of a weekend Arabic school in New Zealand. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 8(2), Article 21. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2326822582?sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals

Center for Immigration Studies. (2025). Foreign-born number and share of U.S. population at all-time highs in January 2025. https://cis.org/Report/ForeignBorn-Number-and-Share-US-Population-AllTime-Highs-January-2025

Ennser-Kananen

(2012). Heritage languages and language policy. In Chapelle

C. A.

(Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–6). Wiley-Blackwell.

Farr

Blenkiron

Harris

Smith

(2018). “It’s my language, my culture, and it’s personal!” Migrant mothers’ experience of language use and identity change in their relationship with their children: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Family Issues, 39(11), 3029–3054. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x18764542

Fatima

(2025). Family language policy and heritage language transmission in Pakistan: The intersection of family dynamics, ethnic identity and cultural practices on language proficiency and maintenance. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1560755. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1560755

Fillmore

L. W.

(2000). Loss of family languages: Should educators be concerned? Theory into Practice, 39, 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3904_3

Flores

Gürel

Putnam

M. T.

(2020). Different perspectives on critical factors in heritage language development and maintenance. Language Learning, 70(S1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12367

Geerlings

Verkuyten

Thijs

(2014). Changes in ethnic self-identification and heritage language preference in adolescence. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34(5), 501–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x14564467

10.

Gharibi

Mirvahedi

(2021). ‘You are Iranian even if you were born on the moon’: Family language policies of the Iranian diaspora in the UK. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(4), 1017–1032. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2021.1935974

11.

Ginting

I. G. K.

(2020). The maintenance of Cakap Karo in Kelurahan Sempakata Medan. Linguistic, English Education and Art Journal, 3(2), 476–485. https://doi.org/10.31539/leea.v3i2.1317

12.

Guardado

(2018). Discourse, ideology and heritage language socialization: Micro and Macro perspectives. Walter de Gruyter.

13.

Hosseini

Haukås

Å.

(2024). The role of parental language profile and home linguistic environment in shaping teenagers’ multilingual identity. Nordic Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 12(2), 222–239. https://doi.org/10.46364/njltl.v12i2.1287

14.

Humeau

Guimard

Nocus

Galharret

J.-M.

(2025). Parental language practices and children’s use of the minority language: The mediating role of children’s language attitudes. International Journal of Bilingualism, 29(1), 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069231207326

15.

Inan

Nişancı

Harris

(2024). Preserving heritage language in Turkish families in the USA. Languages, 9(2), Article 56. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9020056

16.

Kilpi-Jakonen

Kwon

H. W.

(2023). The behavioral and mental health benefits of speaking the heritage language within immigrant families: The moderating role of family relations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 52(10), 2158–2181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-023-01807-5

17.

Kim

(2011). Korean immigrant mothers’ perspectives: the meanings of a Korean heritage language school for their children’s American early schooling experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(2), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-011-0453-1

18.

Lantolf

Minakova

(2020). Sociocultural theory and concept-based language instruction. Language Teaching, 54(3), 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444820000348

19.

Lao

(2004). Parents’ attitudes toward Chinese–English bilingual education and Chinese-language use. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(1), 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2004.10162614

20.

(2020). Home language-learning strategies chosen by Chinese immigrant families. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(5), Article 155. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v10n5p155

21.

Liang

(2018). Parental perceptions toward and practices of heritage language maintenance: Focusing on the United States and Canada. International Journal of Language Studies, 12(2), 65–86. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581470

22.

Lindholm-Leary

K. J.

(2001). Dual language education. In Genesee

(Ed.), Educating English language learners: A synthesis of research evidence (pp. 83–108). Cambridge University Press.

23.

Little

(2022). ‘Half of who you are’: Parent and child reflections on the emotional experiences of reversing familial language shift. International Journal of Bilingualism, 27(2), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069221125705

24.

Loriato

(2019). Language use and intergenerational transmission of heritage Veneto in the rural area of Santa Teresa, Brazil. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2019(260), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2019-2047

25.

Luangpipat

(2025). Intergenerational shifts of heritage language ideologies through a language ecology lens. Heritage Language Journal, 22(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1163/15507076-bja10037

26.

Lumabi

Maleon

(2022). English and Tagalog vocabulary of preschoolers: A contrastive analysis. LLT Journal: A Journal of Language and Language Teaching, 25, 63–81. http://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v25i1.4494

27.

Luo

Escobar

Tamis-LeMonda

(2020). Heterogeneity in the trajectories of us Latine mothers’ dual-language input from infancy to preschool. First Language, 40(3), 275–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723720915401

28.

Makarova

Terekhova

Mousavi

(2017). Children’s language exposure and parental language attitudes in Russian-as-a-heritage-language acquisition by bilingual and multilingual children in Canada. International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(2), 457–485. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006917740058

29.

Martínez

G. A.

(2016). Goals and beyond in heritage language education: From competencies to capabilities. In Fairclough

Beaudrie

S. M.

(Eds.), Innovative strategies for heritage language teaching: A practical guide for the classroom (pp. 39–55). Georgetown University Press.

30.

Migration Policy Institute. (2024, April). Frequently requested statistics on immigrants and immigration in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states-2024?utm_source=chatgpt.com

31.

Nguyen

M. V. H.

Serafini

E. J.

Leeman

Winsler

(2023). Factors predicting secondary school language course enrollment and performance among U.S. heritage speakers of Spanish. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1035716. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1035716

32.

Nguyen-Thi

Truong

V. T.

Nguyen

X. T. K.

Tran-Chi

(2024). The relationship between academic performance, peer pressure, and educational stress as it relates to high school students’ openness to seeking professional psychological help. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 13(1), Article 83. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v13n1p83

33.

Pittman

Glimois

(2024). Intentionality and adaptability in family language policy. Sustainable Multilingualism, 24(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.2478/sm-2024-0002

34.

Polinsky

Scontras

(2020). Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 4–20.

35.

Romanowski

(2021). A deliberate language policy or a perceived lack of agency: Heritage language maintenance in the polish community in Melbourne. International Journal of Bilingualism, 25(5), 1214–1234. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069211000850

36.

Salvador

N. D.

Nicoladis

Diego

A. P. N.

(2017). Catching English: constructing language choice between Tagalog–English bilingual siblings (OLBI working papers 8). https://doi.org/10.18192/olbiwp.v8i0.2116

37.

Scontras

Fuchs

Polinsky

(2015). Heritage language and linguistic theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1545. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01545

38.

Shen

Jiang

(2023). Parents’ planning, children’s agency and heritage language education: Re-storying the language experiences of three Chinese immigrant families in Australia. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1083813. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1083813

39.

Smith-Christmas

(2021). Using a ‘family language policy’ lens to explore the dynamic and relational nature of child agency. Children & Society, 36(3), 354–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12461

40.

Sugiyanta

(2020). Parents’ language attitudes towards languages and maintenance of heritage language. Dialectical Literature and Educational Journal, 5(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.51714/dlejpancasakti.v5i1.13.pp.43-52

41.

Szilágyi

Szécsi

(2023). Translanguaging in family communication. Hungarian Cultural Studies, 16, 143–162 . https://doi.org/10.5195/ahea.2023.511

42.

Tran

Verdon

McLeod

Wang

(2022). Family language policies of Vietnamese–Australian families. Journal of Child Science, 12(1), e67–e78. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1743490

43.

Umbal

Nagy

(2021). Heritage Tagalog phonology and a variationist framework of language contact. Languages (Basel), 6(4), Article 201. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages6040201

44.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2025). Population projections: 2025 national population projections tables. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popproj.html

45.

Wang

Hatoss

(2024). Language policy and planning for heritage language maintenance: A scoping review. Current Issues in Language Planning, 25(5), 612–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2024.2341203.

46.

Wang

(2022). Speaking Chinese or no breakfast: Emotional challenges and experiences confronting Chinese immigrant families in heritage language maintenance. International Journal of Bilingualism, 27(2), 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069221126043

47.

Wilson

(2020). To mix or not to mix: Parental attitudes towards translanguaging and language management choices. International Journal of Bilingualism, 25(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006920909902

48.

You

(2005). Children negotiating Korean American ethnic identity through their heritage language. Bilingual Research Journal, 29(3), 711–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2005.10162860

49.

Yousef

Taylor-Leech

(2018). “It would be nice if someone took the load off you”: Arabic-speaking new-Australian mothers and the challenges of heritage language maintenance. Journal of Home Language Research, 3, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.16993/jhlr.33

50.

Zhou

(2024). Sociocultural theory in early childhood education. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media, 51(1), 190–196. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/51/20240981

Maintaining heritage languages across generations: Parental strategies and youth perspectives in U.S. immigrant families

Abstract

Aims and Objectives/Purpose/Research Questions:

Design/Methodology/Approach:

Data and Analysis:

Findings/Conclusions:

Originality:

Significance/Implications:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References