Language use in the neighbourhood of Empangeni and Richards Bay

Moyo, Themba

doi:10.1080/02572117.2000.10587419

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This treatment of as many recent studies in this field as possible has resulted in the omission of some language families and countries for lack of space, which is no reflection on the quality and timeliness of the research. In a feeble attempt to fill in some of these gaps, I shall mention a few of these additional areas: South African languages, which have been researched by de Klerk (2001Klerk ( , 2000 and Moyo (2000) (see also Kamwangamalu, this volume), and German in South Africa (de Kadt 2000); Iran and the Iranian community in the United States (Modarresi, 2001); multilingualism in India (Annamalai, 2001); Brazil (Mello, 2001); the Balkans (Ozolins, 1999;Romanov, 2000); Scandanavia: Finnish, Tornedalen Finnish, Sami (Lapp), Yiddish, and Romani in Sweden (Lainio, 2000); Finnish in Sweden and Norway (Huss, 2000); Judeo-Spanish of Sephardic Jews in Salonika, Greece (Weis, 2000); Sami (Lapp) in Norway, Sweden, and Finland (Jahr, 2000); Icelandic in Iceland (Wiechers, 2000); Moluccan in the Netherlands (Florey & Van Engelenhoven, 2001); Chechen in Jordan (Dweik, 2000); Komi-Zyrian (a Uralic language) in northeast European Russia (Leinonen, 2000); Karelian in a Russian village (Pyoli, 1999); German in the Czech Republic (Nekvapil, 2001); and Kristang, a creole used by the Portuguese Eurasians of Malacca in Malaysia (David & Faridah, 1999).…”

Section: Too Wide a Net?mentioning

confidence: 99%

2. Recent Research on Language Maintenance

Garcia¹

2003

Ann Rev Appl Linguist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From its beginnings to the present, research in the field of language maintenance and shift has advocated the preservation of ethnic minority and immigrant languages. This review of current published literature, which continues that advocacy, focuses on a narrow time frame (approximately 1998–2002) in order to provide broad, worldwide coverage of different language contact situations. The discussion largely excludes questions of language policy and planning, but includes studies that use traditional as well as newer methodologies to illuminate how educational institutions, the media, ethnic language literacy, family relationships, and friendship networks—to name the more significant factors in maintenance—can be employed to encourage maintenance and language revitalization. After considering recent theoretical and critical works, this review surveys various countries in which research within ethnic and minority language communities illuminates language maintenance, or shift, or revitalization for that group. Current research suggests that use of the ethnic language in the family and friendship networks and its transgenerational transmission are still of crucial importance, as are the conditions in the greater society that provide support for its linguistic viability as a means of communication within and outside the immediate community.

show abstract

Section: Too Wide a Net?mentioning

confidence: 99%

2. Recent Research on Language Maintenance

Garcia¹

2003

Ann Rev Appl Linguist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many people regard it as a grammarless mixture of languages and equally believe that people who code-switch are not proficient to converse in either of the two languages (Setati, 2002). Moyo (2000) argues that most bilinguals are fairly capable of maintaining proficiency in their respective first languages. Moreover, some people hold the view that it lowers communication standards and students who do not share the same first language will be neglected (Cook, 2002cited in Sert, 2005.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%