by Jack Kurlinski
These reflections on multilingual practices are part of a cumulative project from Kathleen Guerra’s Spring 2023 ASEM: The politics of bilingualism in the US. Students were asked to reflect on how multilingual practices, coupled by the formal and informal language policies in their communities, have cumulatively shaped their identities.
In recent years, there has been a shift within the US and several other countries that has encouraged the public to recognize the intersection between language practice and ethnic identity (Kang, 2013). This is perhaps, in part, due to the many languages being introduced by immigrants to various countries around the world (Ricento, 2005). One group whose language practices have been historically underrecognized, despite their extensive diaspora, are Koreans. Korean immigrants, much like other immigrant groups, have passed down their language from generation to generation leading to a relatively large group of heritage speakers (Nagano, 2015). Korean heritage speakers in the United States tend to share very similar language practices regardless of fluency. This includes using both English and Korean for distinct communicative purposes: Korean heritage speakers typically use English as their primary means of communication, while Korean is used in more specific contexts in which they are interacting with other Korean speakers, who are oftentimes family members. For many Korean heritage speakers, Korean is connected to their childhood memories, their culture, and familial relationships (Kang, 2013). Ultimately, in the US, Korean heritage speakers’ language practices reflect the ways in which aspects of their Korean and American identities intersect to form a third culture, where they have assimilated aspects from both the cultures they are a part of (Kang, 2013).
I have found that as a third-generation Korean heritage speaker, I identify strongly with the previously discussed language practices shared among heritage speakers. Growing up, I primarily spoke Korean, specifically Gyeongsang dialect, at home with my mother and grandmother, and up until around the age of five I would have considered myself to be Korean-dominant. However, upon starting elementary school, English became my primary means of communication, and consequently, after stagnating for a short period of time my Korean proficiency began to regress. In spite of this, I still utilize the language as much as possible. Currently, I speak Korean at home approximately 30% of the time. Otherwise, I only use Korean when communicating with someone who speaks the language exclusively, such as my grandmother. Korean language and culture have been incredibly important parts of my life. Over the years, I have realized that most of what constitutes my identity including my interests, my hobbies, the food I eat, my beliefs, and my personality have all been influenced by Korean culture to some degree. Yet, most of my social ties are to non-Korean English speakers or native Japanese speakers, as I also speak Japanese proficiently. I believe that my bilingualism and multicultural upbringing have served to connect me to both the cultures I am a part of and are what have helped me navigate my sense of belonging to America and my American-ness, while also helping to ground me in Korean culture.
Navigating my relationship between my ethnic identity and heritage language has been an ongoing process, which has proven to be fluid and subject to change based on my surroundings. Although for the most part, this has been an enjoyable process that has helped me to learn more about myself and my ancestry, there have been occasions where outside influences have made existing as a bilingual and multicultural person challenging. One way this typically manifests is through exclusionary or judgemental language policies and ideologies. I can recall several specific circumstances where my use of Korean was criticized or disfavored; however, one in particular that stands out to me occurred during high school. During my lunch period, I would often call my mom to let her know my plans for the evening, what type of homework I would be working on, etc. Although she spoke Korean to me over the phone, I would tend to respond in English as it was easier for me. However, on one occasion I spoke with her in Korean per her request. After I hung up the phone, a teacher who had been nearby asked me what language I was speaking, when I told her I was speaking Korean she told me that “I had no reason to be speaking that language” and that while at school I needed to use English only as not to “cause others to feel uncomfortable”. In retrospect, I realize that there was nothing inherently wrong with speaking Korean in school, although the de facto language was English. However, the fact that my teacher, who held a position of authority over me, was the one criticizing my language use made me hesitant to argue with her. I feared that doing so would only lead to further consequences for me.
The aforementioned interaction specifically caused me to modify my language use out of fear of judgment by my peers and the potential consequences of speaking Korean in spaces where English is the expected, and most tolerated language. Despite the fact that I currently speak Korean both in public and in private if my mom is around, there was a period of time after this incident occurred when I refused to speak Korean outside of my home. In doing this, I feel like I lost my sense of self. Having to assimilate with the dominant language made me feel shame and prevented me from interacting with my culture in a meaningful way. Moreover, because of this interaction, I missed out on many opportunities to practice using my Korean, which resulted in my Korean proficiency further decreasing.
The enforcement of my teacher’s personal English-only language policy can be seen as an example of how public language policy can affect individual language practice. English-only language policies have the potential to favor certain language practices at the expense of others, particularly those of non-native English speakers or bilingual speakers of other languages. For example, by adopting an English-only language policy, my teacher gave the impression that English was the only language that was valued and important in the school community. This, in turn, created a sense of marginalization and exclusion for students like me and their families who speak languages other than English at home and ultimately served to undermine our cultural identities.
It is important to recognize that language is a fundamental part of individual and group identity and that promoting linguistic diversity and inclusion is essential for creating an equitable and just society. English-only language policies can compromise these goals by promoting linguistic assimilation and marginalizing non-native English speakers and multilingual individuals. Instead, schools and communities should adopt policies that value and respect linguistic diversity, and encourage language learning and proficiency in multiple languages.