Flaman Bölgesi’ndeki Türkçe Konuşurlarının Dil Kullanımı ve Dil Tutumlarına Yönelik Belirleyiciler: Nesil Farklılıkları Odaklı Bir Çalışma

Year 2014, Issue: 70, 59 - 80, 01.06.2014

N. Feyza Altınkamış Orhan Ağırdağ

Abstract

Bu araştırma, Belçika’nın Flaman Bölgesi’nde yaşayan göçmen Türklerin anadilleri Türkçeye karşı olan tutum, tercih ve kullanımlarını nesiller arası farkı dikkate alarak incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Alanda önde gelen çalışmalardan biri olan Yağmur ve van de Vijfer (2012) tarafından yapılan araştırma model alınarak, 136 katılımcıya “Dil Kullanımı ve Tercihi Ölçeği” ve “Türkçeye Yö- nelik Tutum Ölçeği” verilmiştir. Nesil, sosyal statü, doğum yeri ve cinsiyet faktörlerinin Türkçeye yönelik tutum üzerinde etkili olabileceği varsayımlarından hareketle, bu faktörler araştırmada bağımsız değişkenler olarak ele alınmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçları nesil değişkeni ile beraber yabancı ülkede geçirilen süre değişkeninin bazı değişkenlerle anlamlı olarak ilişkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, sonuçlar, sosyal statünün de anlamlı bir şekilde katılımcıların Türkçeye yönelik tutumları üzerinde etkili olduğunu işaret etmektedir. Çalışmada, cinsiyet faktörünün dile yönelik hiçbir değişken ile bağlantısı olmadığı görülmektedir.

Keywords

Dil tutumları, azınlık dili olarak Türkçe, Flaman Bölgesi, dil kullanımı ve dil tercihi

Determinants of Language Use and Attitudes among Turkish Speakers in Flanders: A Focus on Generational Difference

Abstract

The focus of this research is Turkish immigrants’ language usepreference and language attitudes towards their first language, Turkish, in terms of intergenerational differences in the Flemish speaking part of Belgium. Borrowing the procedure by Yagmur and van de Vijver (2012), 136 participants were given “The Language Use, Choice and Preference Scale” and “The Attitudes to Turkish Language Scale”. As we hypothesized that social class, place of birth, gender and age would be related to attitudes to Turkish, they were considered as independent variables in the study. The results indicated that generation with length of residence was significantly associated with some variables. Also, social class was found to be a significant contributor to respondents’ attitudes towards Turkish. Gender was not a relevant category in terms of all language outcomes

Keywords

Language attitudes, Turkish as a minority language, Flanders, language use-preference

References

• Agirdag, Orhan (2010). “Exploring bilingualism in a monolingual school system: insights from Turkish and native students from Belgian schools”. British Journal of Sociology of Education 31 (3): 307-321.
• Agirdag, Orhan, Piet van Avermaet and Mieke van Houtte (2013). “School Segregation and Math Achievement: A Mixed-Method Study on the Role of Self-Fulfilling Prophecies”. Teachers College Record 115 (3): 1-50.
• Akinci, Mehmet Ali (2008). “Language use and biliteracy practices of Turkish speaking children and adolescents in France”. Multilingualism and Identities across Contetxs: Cross Disciplinary Perspectives on Turkish-speaking Youth in Europe. Ed. Lytra, V & Jorgenson, J. Kopenhagen University Press. 45, 85-108.
• Akinci, Mehmet Ali and Nathalie Decool-Mercier (2010). “Aspects of language acquisition and disorders in Turkish-French bilingual children”. Communication disorders in Turkish in monolingual and multilingual settings. Ed. S. Topbaş & M. Yavaş. 314-353.
• Arends-Tóth, Judith and Fons J.R. van de Vijver (2003). “Multiculturalism and acculturation: views of Dutch and Turkish-Dutch”. European Journal of Social Psychology 33 (2): 249-266.
• _____, (2004). “Domains and dimensions in acculturation: Implicit theories of Turkish-Dutch”. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28: 19-35.
• Backus, Ad (2004). “Convergence as a mechanism of language change”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7 (2): 179-181.
• Backus Ad and Hanneke van der Heijden (1998). “Life and birth of a bilingual: the mixed code of bilingual children and adults in the Turkish community in the Netherlands”. The Mainz Meeting. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Ed. L. Johanson. August 3-6. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 527-55.
• _____, (2002).” Language mixing by young Turkish children in the Netherlands”. Psychology of Language and Communication 6 (1): 55-73.
• Berry, John W and Rudolf Kalin (1995). “Multicultural and ethnic attitudes in Canada: An overview of the 1991 National Survey”. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 27 (3): 301.
• Blommaert, Jan, L. Creve and Evita Willaert (2006). “On Being Declared Illiterate: Language-Ideological Disqualification in Dutch Classes for Immigrants in Belgium”. Language & Communication 26 (1): 34-54.
• Bollen, Katrien and Kristof Baten (2010). “Bilingual Education in Flanders: Policy and Press Debate (1999–2006)”. The Modern Language Journal 94 (3): 412-433.
• Bourhis, Richard Yvon, Howard Giles and Doreen Rosenthal (1981). “Notes on the construction of a “Subjective Vitality Questionnaire” for ethnolinguistic groups”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 2: 144-155.
• Cemiloglu, İsmet and Ulker Sen (2012). “The Attitudes of Turkish Children Who Live in Belgium towards Turkish in terms of Demographical Features”. Journal of World of Turks 4(2): 7-26.
• Erikson, Robert and John H. Goldthorpe (1992). The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Giles, Howard, Doreen Rosenthal and Louis Young (1977). “Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations”. Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations. Ed. H. Giles. London: Academic Press.
• Huls, Erica (2000). “Power in Turkish Migrant Families”. Discourse and Society 11(3): 345-372.
• Jacobs, Dirk and Andrea Rea (2006). “Construction and Import of Ethnic Categorisations: “Allochtones” in the Netherlands and Belgium”. Paper prepared for the EURODIV conference 26-27 Jan. Milano.
• Johnson, Patricia, Howard Giles and Richard Yvon Bourhis (1983). “The Viability of Ethnolinguistic Vitality: A Reply”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 4: 255-269.
• Kaya, Ayhan and Ferhat Kentel (2008). Belçika Türkleri: Türkiye ile Avrupa Birliği Arasında Köprü mü Engel mi? İstanbul Bilgi University Publications.
• Kauschke, Christina, Hae-Wook Lee and Soyeong Pae (2007). “Similarities and Variation in noun and verb acquisition a crosslinguistic study of children learning German, Korean and Turkish”. Language and Cognitive Processes 22: 1-28.
• Kipp, Sandra, Michael Clyne and Anne Pauwels (1995). Immigration and Australia’s Language Resources. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
• Manco, Altay (2000). “Belçika’da Türklerin 40 yılı (1960-2000): Sorunlar, Gelişmeler, Değişmeler”. Muğla University, Journal of Social Sciences 1(1): 119-133.
• Manco, Altay (2002). “Göçmen Türklerin Belçika Eğitim Sisteminde Yeri”. C.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 26 (1): 61-68.
• Pfaff, Carol (1994). “Early bilingual development of Turkish children in Berlin”. Crosslinguistic study of bilingual development. Ed. G. Extra and L. Verhoeven. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
• Phalet, Karen, Claudia van Lotringen and Han Entzinger (2000). Islam in de multiculturele samenleving. Utrecht: ERCOMER.
• Quentin, Schoonvaere (2013). Demografische Studie over de Populatie van Turkse Herkomst in Belgie. Report presented by Centrum voor Gelijkheid van Kansen en voor Racismebestrijding, Brussels.
• Reitz, Jeffrey G. (1980). The Survival of Ethnic Groups. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
• Sachdev, Itesh (1995). “Language and Identity: Ethnolinguistic Vitality of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada”. The London Journal of Canadian Studies 11: 41-59.
• Sachdev, Itesh and Richard Bourhis (1990). “Language and Social Identification”. Social Identity Theory: Constructive and critical advances. Ed. D. Abrams and M. Hogg. Harvester-Wheatsheaf. 101-124.
• Sachdev, Itesh, Richard Bournis, Sue-wen Phang and John D’Eye (1987). “Language Attitudes and Vitality Perceptions: Intergenerational Effects amongst Chinese Canadian Communities”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 6: 287-307.
• Sam, David L. and John W. Berry (2006). Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology. Ed. S. L. David and J.W. Berry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Yagmur, Kutlay (2004). “Language maintenance patterns of Turkish immigrant communities in Australia and Western Europe: The impact of majority attitudes on ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 165: 121-42.
• _____, (2010a). “Evaluation of Turkish teaching within the language policy framework of Western Europe”. Journal of Social Sciences in the Turkish World 55 (10): 221-241.
• _____, (2010b). “The role of national and ethnic media in the escalation of sociocultural conflict”. Langues et Littératures 20: 169-191.
• Yagmur, Kutlay and Fons J.R. van de Vijver (2012). “Acculturation and Language Orientations of Turkish Immigrants in Australia, France, Germany and the Netherlands”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 43 (7): 1110- 1130.
• Yagmur, Kutlay, Kees De Bot and Hubert Korzilius (1999). “Language Attrition, Language Shift and Ethnolinguistic Vitality of Turkish in Australia”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 20 (1): 51-69.
• Yagmur, Kutlay and Mehmet Ali Akinci (2003). “Language use, choice, maintenance and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish speakers in France: Intergenerational differences”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 164: 107-128.
• Wets, Johan (2006). “The Turkish Community in Austria and Belgium: The Challenge of Integration”. Turkish Studies 7 (1): 85-100. http://statbel.fgov.be/nl/statistieken/cijfers/ [Access date: May 05, 2013]