Master Thesis

MASTER THESIS

Language maintenance and shift of two Armenian communities in Athens

and Istanbul: A comparative study

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Details of student:

 Name: TalinKiroumpian  ANR: 682197

Name of the Supervisor(s):

 Name supervisor 1: Prof. Dr. K. Yagmur  Name supervisor 2: Dr. V. Draulans  Name of MTO supervisor: Dr. H.G. Siebers  Title of the Circle: Language Maintenance Shift  Word count: 21.000 approx.

1 Abstract

In this study I intended to investigate language maintenance and shift patterns of Armenians living in two different cultural contexts: Athens and Istanbul. Given the large socio-historical and cultural differences regarding Armenian communities in the two cities, exploring language use, choice, preference and dominance of Armenian will be interesting. Due to the cultural and religious differences between Armenians and the two other communities (i.e., Greeks and Turks), I assume Armenians’ identity perception in the two contexts would be different. This study has a comparative study design in order to highlight the differences in the language use patterns between those respective communities. First, the differences will be explored through a survey aiming at both students who are over fourteen years old, parents and members of the Armenian community. In addition, interviews will be used to gain a deeper insight and understanding of identity issues. The focus is on language maintenance efforts of Armenian people who had a long history of struggle with issues of bilingualism and language shift. Diglossia is a term used to define the involvement of a community with two languages (Ferguson, 1959; Fishman, 1972, 1980). Fishman (1972, 1980) defines diglossia as the existence of two languages side by side within a geographical area. Fishman and Garc a (2010) claim that language is a group’s symbol of identity and a cement of basic social, emotional and spiritual principles of a community that are transmitted from generation to generation. The continuity and maintenance or shift in language use is greatly dependent on these issues. In this research is important to include the notion of ethnic identity as a major factor of influence regarding issues of language choice and language use patterns. There is a little research that had been conducted in Armenian communities of Athens and Istanbul. Embedded in this research the notion of ethnic identity is highlighted, the language maintenance and shift issues are discussed and the coexistence of the two languages influenced by historical perspectives is analyzed. Due to the little research that has been conducted concerning issues of language maintenance and shift, this research aims to contribute to the field of linguistics and especially to issues of language maintenance and shift with 199 questionnaires and 16 interviews that have been selected and conducted in a period of almost two months regarding the Armenian language in two different cultural contexts of Athens and Istanbul.

Key words: language maintenance and shift, ethnic and cultural identity, ethnolinguistic vitality, social networks, Armenian, Armenian schools in Athens, Armenian schools in Istanbul, Armenian cultural institutions in Athens, Armenian cultural institutions in Istanbul.

2 Contents Acknowledgments...... 5

1. Introduction ...... 6

1.1. Overview ...... 6

1.2. General Profile of the thesis ...... 6

1.3. The target group ...... 7

1.4. Overview of the thesis ...... 8

2. The Armenian Community in Athens and in Istanbul ...... 9

3. Theoretical Background ...... 11

4. Research Methodology ...... 18

4.1. Research Question ...... 18

4.2. Research Design ...... 19

4.3. Data Collection ...... 20

4.4. Data Analysis ...... 20

4.5. Survey Instrument ...... 22

4.6. Interviewees Profile ...... 24

4.7. Sample Strategy ...... 25

4.8. Research Quality Indicators...... 26

5. Results ...... 28

5.1. Background Information...... 28

5.2. Ethnic Identification ...... 30

5.3. Cultural Identity...... 32

5.4. Cultural norms and values ...... 33

5.5. Social Network ...... 34

5.6. Ethnolinguistic Vitality ...... 34

5.7. Language choice, use and preference ...... 35

5.8. Demographic Status...... 38

5.9. Education ...... 39

5.10. Media ...... 43

5.11. Religious Matters and Marriage patterns ...... 45

5.12. Cultural Organizations and activities ...... 47

5.13. Discussion...... 50

6. Conclusions and Discussion ...... 54

6.1. Identity ...... 54

6.2. Social Networking ...... 55

6.3. Religious matters and marriage patterns ...... 56

6.4. Ethnolinguistic Vitality ...... 57

6.5. Language use, choice and preference patterns ...... 58

Some Final Remarks ...... 59

Limitations ...... 60

References ...... 62

Acknowledgements

My research project has been possible with the help and support of numerous people, some of whom I would like to mention here. First and foremost, I offer my utmost gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Kutlay Yagmur, who read numerous versions and revisions of this research and guided me in the right direction. Without his patience, valuable advice, support and deep knowledge this research would have been impossible. From the very early stages of this research until the very end, his extraordinary experiences and thoughts combined with his unflinching encouragement and his friendly approach made this research project possible. I gratefully acknowledge my second reader Dr. Verlee Draulans for her valuable advice, active interest and crucial contribution to this thesis. I am deeply grateful to my contact person in Istanbul Ms. Quin Minassian whose valuable personal contacts gave me the opportunity and the pleasure to meet and interact with a bunch of beautiful people who made my stay in Istanbul extraordinary. In addition, I would like to acknowledge and express my deep gratitude to my second contact person in Istanbul Mr. Arsen Arsek who became the link between me and the Armenian schools in Istanbul. Without him my observations in the Armenians schools, the students’ participation and finally the interviews with the respectful directors, head of schools would simply be impossible. Moreover, I would like to thank Ms. Frago Karaoglan for her great hospitality. She kindly offered me her beautiful house, her office facilities and the most important her delicious Turkish-Greek mixed dishes. She made my stay in Istanbul even more fascinating and interesting. One of the challenges of this project was to obtain data from the participants, as 199 informants participated in the survey. In addition, 16 interviewees kindly accepted to conduct an in-depth interview with me. I would like to express my apology that I could not mention all of them personally one by one. Nevertheless, all the participants and all the interviewees have my utmost respect and gratitude. In addition, I would to mention that this research was supported financially from Tilburg University. Additionally, I would like to thank the extended family of 397, Gabriele, Dene, Mirsim, Bilal and Akos who made the grey, rainy days in Tilburg much brighter and shiner with good food, couple of beers and interesting conversations. They say “True friendship continue to grow even over longest distances”. We will keep and feed our family-friendship until our next reunion. Finally, my best friends are noteworthy; Arman, Agop, Ioanna and Armen who were, are and will be the most valuable persons and my infinite source of love and inspiration.

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

1.1. Overview This research project deals primarily with the relationship between language, ethnic identification, cultural identity, social networks and ethnolinguistic vitality. Its aim was to investigate the language maintenance and shift of two Armenian communities in Athens and in Istanbul. A further objective was to examine Armenian language behavior and attitude through a closer inspection of the relationship between the issues of ethnic and cultural identification, social networking and ethnolingusitic vitality. After the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, Armenians, Jews and Greek were officially recognized as religious minorities in Turkey. As a result, Armenians were able to maintain Armenian schools to teach their language, Armenian churches to practice their religion and Armenian cultural activities to promote their Armenian culture and identity. However, Armenian community in Athens has yet no legal entity despite of Armenians long existence in the country. The responsible principles within the Armenian community still struggle with administrative, bureaucratic and legal issues. During my observations in both communities I had the chance to explore, examine and investigate the educational policies within Armenian schools, the role of religion and finally the functionality of churches not only as spiritual but also as ethnic and cultural centers. Additionally, I had the opportunity to closely observe the operation of Armenian cultural organizations as well as the influence of Armenian media in the mainstream societies of Athens and Istanbul. During my interviews with the different interviewees I had the opportunity to gain a great insight and to capture their experiences. In addition, during my observations I realized how Armenians value their Armenian ethnic and cultural identity both in Athens and in Istanbul. Finally, both communities warmly welcomed me and shared their stories with me.

1.2.General profile of the thesis

This research is part of cross-national project between two different cities; Athens and Istanbul. These cities are referred to in the second chapter of this research as being representatives of two different cases concerning the status quo and the demographic background of Armenian communities living in those two different cross-cultural contexts. One of the basic premises of this project is that the connection that Armenians in Istanbul maintain with their land has a decisive impact on shaping Armenian cultural and ethnic identity. Armenians do not consider themselves diasporic and they feel Istanbul being their Fatherland that connects them with the last piece of their homeland, Anatolia. On the other hand, Armenians in Athens are diasporic far away from their homeland. Those different attitudes deeply and greatly

influence not only the patterns of language use, choice and preference but also issues of ethnic identification, cultural identity and ethnolingusitic vitality. In research studies, it is a common phenomenon to compare different ethnolinguistic groups within the same national context. Yet there is a lack of empirical research and methodological studies on the same ethnolinguistic groups such as Armenians in different contexts such as Athens and in Istanbul. The approach taken in this study to compare the two Armenian communities provides further opportunities for investigating the possible effects of identity related to language behavior and attitude of Armenians living in Athens and in Istanbul. For the purpose of this research, Armenian communities in these two different cultural contexts were chosen as the target group because comparing them will give us interesting information and insights into the processes of language maintenance and shift. The present research was based on a methodological approach of language maintenance and shift adapted from Yagmur and Van der Vijver (2012). In this research 199 Armenian informants participated in Athens and Istanbul. Additionally, this research includes 16 interviews with members of Armenian communities in both cultural contexts. In addition, during my stay there I had the opportunity to closely observe those two communities and also interact with different interlocutors. Language maintenance and shift phenomenon are the major focus of this research. Alongside with this, issues of ethnic identification, cultural identity, social interaction patterns and ethnic and linguistic vitality were examined and highlighted.

1.3.The target group

Given the fact of long existence of Armenians in Athens and in Istanbul and given their extensive duration of their exposure to those two societies, it has been possible to do this research in those two different Armenian communities that share numerous similarities and differences. Those similarities and differences will be highlighted in this master thesis as well as issues of ethnic identification and social interaction not only between Armenian themselves but also between Armenians and the members of the majority groups. To test the given dimensions above, 199 Armenian participants were included in the survey study and 16 interviewees. There were 102 female informants that participated in the survey and 94 males whereas 3 of the informants decided not to provide background, personal information at all. From the total of 16 interviewees, 10 of them were male and 6 were female. The data was gathered in many parts of Athens and Istanbul that are known as concentration areas for Armenian community members during the period of two months (April-May 2014). Armenian informants’ categorization has been made on the basis of their birth country, the age, the gender, the marriage status and the city of residence.

1.4.Overview of the thesis

There are 6 chapters in this thesis. Chapter 2 offers a general profile of both Armenian communities in Athens and in Istanbul. In addition this chapter attempts to give some background information regarding the educational, religious and cultural institutions and organizations that are facilitated within those two communities and they actively try to protect Armenian cultural and ethnic identity. Chapter 3 focuses on the literature and the theoretical background concerning issues of language maintenance and shift, ethnic identification, ethnolinguistic vitality and social interactions. It explores frameworks of language shift and maintenance as well as models of ethnic identification. Accordingly, findings of earlier studies on the topic are reviewed in the third chapter. Chapter 4 deals with the research methodology. In this chapter, the aim and rationale behind the research, information about the informants, questionnaires, data collection, data analysis, sample strategy and finally research quality indicators and data processing procedures are explained and critically discussed. In Chapter 5 the findings and results of both qualitative and quantitative method of empirical research are presented in an organized and structured manner. First, the results derived from the quantitative data are presented. Afterwards, the qualitative results are offered in order to fill in the gaps and enrich the results from the questionnaires with the personal experiences, insights and stories of the interviewees. The advantage of this combined method of empirical research yielded valuable findings for this study. Chapter 6 offers conclusions and discussion. In this respect, some important issues are discussed and some remarks are made. Finally, the limitations of this research project are also pointed out.

CHAPTER 2

The Armenian community in Athens and in Istanbul

Given the large differences in extra-linguistic factors (societal conditions) between Greece and Turkey, I would like to compare and contrast the Armenians' language use, choice patterns and language attitudes in the respective countries. In order to achieve this goal some background information for both respective communities are needed; Armenians living in Turkey are emotionally and greatly bonded with the land since they feel that they never left home. They experience their role in Turkey as the defenders of the Armenian cultural heritage and identity. As a result, Armenians might strongly maintain their language in Turkey since language is not only a means of communication but also a strong indicator of cultural heritage and identity (Kroon &Vallen, 2006). In order to protect their cultural heritage and identity, Armenians living both in Greece and Turkey have their own specific cultural activities taking place within the Armenian community institutions. In this domain, Armenian language use is highly promoted to encourage language maintenance. In this respect, this research aims to investigate the different social structures that govern choices of the people regarding language maintenance and shift. Alongside with cultural organizations and institutions, nowadays, Armenians in Athens maintain three schools and several churches attempting to persist in keeping the language and religion alive. Those schools promote bilingualism since both Armenian and Greek are taught within the school environment. The first school called “Simon Zavarian School” was founded in 1927. The second school called “Levon and Sofi Hagopian School” was founded in 1961 and finally the third school called “Galbagian School” was founded in 1966.The language maintenance and shift issue is not limited to family and school but it is also one of the fundamental concerns of the Armenian churches. Churches in both respective Armenian communities in Athens and in Istanbul are part of peoples’ culture and identity. In this research, churches will be examined not based their religious functionality but based on their role as a domain and a location where Armenian culture and language blooms. There are 12 Armenian churches (Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant) functioning nowadays in Greece. Churches are trying to recruit Armenian children by organizing events and sometimes traditional music and singing classes. Their role is important in the community and churches are the centers where the ‘Armenianness’ blooms. Armenians living in Istanbul have a unique relationship of Fatherland and Diaspora with the territory. The Armenians, who live in Istanbul and deny calling themselves ‘diasporic’, consider being the last piece of land connecting them with their homeland; Anatolia. Armenians living in Turkey are thankful to the Treaty of Lausanne that gives them the recognition as a religious minority with special rights and principles. Treaty of Lausanne signed in 1923 by representatives of Ottoman Empire on the one side and by Britain, France, Italy, Greece, Japan, Romania and Kingdom of Serbs (Croats, Slovenes; Yugoslavia) on the other side. The treaty recognizes the boundaries of modern Turkey between the Aegean Sea and the Black

Sea. The third section of the Lausanne Treaty with title “Protection of Minorities” included rules and regulations aiming to protect the rights of religious minorities in Turkish Republic (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2014). In this respect, nowadays Armenians, Jews and Greeks enjoy the privilege of officially recognized minority status in Turkey, in contrast with other ethnic minorities such as Kurds (Yagmur, 2001). Having their own schools, Armenians, Greeks and Jews teach their languages and practice their religion freely. Language classes are served by Armenian, Greek and Jewish teachers respectively (Kaya, 2013). Additionally, Armenians living in Istanbul have churches (Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant) to practice their religion, schools to maintain their language and cultural organizations to promote their cultural heritage. Today, according to the Armenian Apostolic Patriarchate, there are 38 churches in Istanbul. However, they confront problems such as lack of priests and obstruction of their autonomy (Hofmann, 2002). Finally, today there are 19 Armenian day schools in Istanbul and one separate kindergarten. The number of Armenians attending the private Armenian schools both in Athens and in Istanbul is declining whereas, in the meantime, the problems concerning these schools are increasing (Hofmann, 2002). Some problems regarding the Armenian schools in Istanbul are addressed in Kaya (2013). The difficulty in training and recruiting Armenian teachers, the poor supply of textbooks and educational materials and the prejudices are some of the reasons that decrease the number of students which need to be dealt with by the community. All these dimensions will be thoroughly investigated in this research project, the problems will be highlighted and possible recommendation if they are applicable will be introduced. Having described the demographic, historical and socio-cultural characteristics and problems regarding the Armenian communities in Athens and Istanbul, the theoretical framework will be presented in the next section.

CHAPTER 3

Theoretical Background; the conceptual framework

In this chapter the focus is on the literature concerning issues of language maintenance and shift, ethnic identification, ethnolinguistic vitality and social interactions. This chapter provides an overview of the conceptual frameworks of language shift and maintenance as well as a critical discussion of issues of cultural and ethnic identity and models of ethnolinguistic vitality. Linguistics is a field of systematic concern of several disciplines as linguistics, sociology and anthropology. ‘In language shift there is a change in the allocation of language varieties to domains. In traditional accounts of language shift it is seen as a very neat domain-by-domain shift, so that the abandoned language is gradually replaced by the target language’ (Fishman, 1972, p.247-248). Language shift refers to the process of the gradual shift from the use of the mother tongue to the dominant language in several domains (Gal, 1979). There are two types of language shift. First, intra-generational language shift and secondly, intergenerational language shift. The first refers to the structural attrition or a language’s functional reduction. The second refers to the structural or functional reduction in the use of immigrant language between first and second or third generation of immigrants. Fishman (1991) claims that language maintenance requires intergenerational transmission of the language. When there is not an intergenerational transmission of a language it can be said that a community of speakers shifted their language to the language of the mainstream society. As a result, Fishman (1991, 2001) introduces Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS) which is a useful indicator of language maintenance and shift. The model consists of eight main stages. The first stage is the stage of strong language maintenance. In last stage (stage eight) the language shift had already taken place with only a limited number of isolated speakers use the language. Fishman in this model emphasizes in the importance of domains. For instance, he claims that the domain of home is very important factor of language maintenance and shift. In line with the previous theory, Fishman (2010) introduces the domain analysis model. The theory of domain analysis examines how the situation and the context play a role in language use and choice. For instance, the social networks or the education are important domains influencing deeply language use patterns. The reasons of language maintenance and shift were discussed extensively by Haugen (1972) who introduced the term of ‘ecology of language’ and Kloss (1968) who analyzed the ambivalent factors which influence the language maintenance and shift. The theory of ‘ecology of language’ argues that the number and the location of speakers of a language have a significant impact in language maintenance and shift patterns. In conjunction with the theory of ‘ecology of language’, Kloss (1968) claims that the ambivalent factors that influence the language maintenance and shift patterns are the numeric strength of the community, the linguistic and social similarity of

ethnic minorities to the dominant group and the attitudes of majority groups regarding to minority groups. Richards, Platt, & Platt (1985) define language shift as the change from the first language to the language of the mainstream society. Appel &Muysken (1987) give their own explanation in terms of language shift. The first generation mainly born in the country of origin is bilingual but the minority language is clearly dominant, the second generation is bilingual as well and either of the two languages may be stronger. The third generation is also bilingual but the language of the mainstream society is the dominant one. Finally, the fourth generation is only proficient in the language of the mainstream society. Hyltenstam& Stroud (1996) introduces the concept of language retention. According this concept, individuals or a community maintain their first language in a second language environment. On the other hand, language loss defined as the difficulty of an individual or a community of which individuals consider themselves as a member to communicate in the first language (Jaspaert& Kroon, 1989). Mesthrie (1999, p. 42) mentions that language maintenance can be defined as ‘the continuing use of language in the face of competition from a regionally and socially powerful or numerically stronger language’. In line with the definition of Fishman and Mesthrie, Labov (1972) distinguishes between speaker innovation and language change. The first refers to the language shift of individuals and the second one to the language shift of a community of speakers. According his theory, for sociolinguistics studies issues of language shift becomes interesting and relevant only when the shift happens in community-wide. Yagmur (1997) mentions that when different definitions of language shift or maintenance are closely examined, it can be seen that the emphasis is first to the sociological aspects of the phenomenon; the factors of language loss and second to the linguistic aspects; how this language loss is manifested. The linguistic aspects can be distinguished into two cases, the linguistic case which examine what is lost and to psycholinguistic case which examine how it is lost. However, in order to identify relevant variables in language maintenance and shift it is important to examine the factors that deeply influence such processes. Hyltenstam & Stroud (1996) suggest that here is no single widely-accepted theory concerning language maintenance and shift. In addition, it is difficult to predict whether a speech community would shift the language to the language of the mainstream society or would maintain L1. Language maintenance refers to a speech community’s use of its first language in numerous domains such as home domain or education domain. The efforts of the speech community maintaining or not L1 are deeply influenced on the basis of the symbolic functions such as group identification or cultural identification (Kipp, Clyne & Pauwels, 1995). There are number of models for the investigation of language maintenance and shift. The model introduced by Hyltenstam & Stroud (1996) can give some important insights. In their model they distinguish three different levels of influence concerning such processes; the societal, the group and the individual level. In addition, they stress the importance of the host society’s policies and attitudes towards minorities and their languages. It is suggested that ‘a minority group that possesses a publicly stigmatized

identity, that has few legislative means at its disposal with which to secure its interests, that lives in the society characterized by an assimilatory ideology, and that is disadvantaged in relation to the majority with respect to economic and educational resources, could be expected to be less likely to maintain its language over time’ (Hyltenstam &Stroud , 1996: 569-70). Secondly, minorities characteristics may either promote or discourage language maintenance and shift. Moreover, the interaction between minority and majority group is another aspect that has to be taken into consideration. Finally, the individuals’ factors such as language choice and socialization patterns constitute the third dimension. Yagmur (1997) makes the distinction between ‘intragenerational’ and ‘intergenerational’. According the first concept individuals lose their language skills because of a break in the linguistic tradition whereas according to the second, generation implies as the language shift when the second language replaces individuals’ first language. The question that arises here is when this language shift takes place. According to Clyne (1991, 2004) the greater the distance between the culture of a community and the culture of the mainstream society the greater the language maintenance on the part of the minority group. On the other hand, if there are several similarities between the culture of the minorities’ and the culture of the mainstream society it is more likely language shift take place in favor of majority language use. Moreover, Hornberger (2002) also attempts to define language shift as a downwards language movement in the language planning literature. Language maintenance refers to the stability and the distribution of the particular language, its proficient usage by children and adults and its conservation in a specific domain (Baker, 2001). Extra &Yagmur (2004) claim that there are two dimensions that deeply influence language maintenance and shift. First, in private domain is the language that families talk at home and in the public domain is the language teaching at schools. Bağci (2012) mention that the changing process from language maintenance to language shift happens in several domains; home, school, work and might occur rapidly or gradually sometimes taking many generations. Additionally, Bağci (2012) claim that there is an intergenerational variation concerning issues of language use, choice and preference. Younger generation aims higher social, economic and educational status. In this respect, they are more interested in the language of the mainstream society than older generation for whom their tradition, norms and values are more important. In this point, the concept of ethnolinguistic vitality proves to be an important part of this paper as it functions as an umbrella concept of language maintenance and shift. Ethnolinguistic vitality (Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor, 1977) is a crucial theoretical framework where the analysis of language maintenance and shift will be possible. In this framework status, demographic, institutional support and control are combined to greatly influence the vitality of ethnolinguistic groups. This vitality might be low, medium or high based on language’s strengths and weaknesses in the different domains. In this respect, ethnolinguistic groups with high vitality are more likely to maintain L1 whereas ethnolinguistic groups with low vitality are more possible to shift to L2. The first domain is the status which include several variables; economic,

social, sociohistorical and language status. Demographic variables refer to the number and the distribution of ethnolinguistic group members within a particular territory. Additionally, demographic variables include demographic data. For instance, marriage patterns, birth place and the immigration background of individuals. Institutional support variables refer to the language speaking in the various institutions within the ethnolinguistic group institutions of a community. For instance, in which extend the domains of mass media, education, government services, religion and politics support the ethnolinguistic vitality of ethnic minority languages. Yagmur (1997) evaluates that concerning Ethnolinguistic Vitality there is a two-way interaction between social identity and language behavior. The sociocultural variables in a society interact with groups’ social identity in terms of ethnolinguistic vitality. Husband & Khan (1982) claim that institutional support from the part of the minority group is a very important component of ethnolinguistic vitality. Extra &Yagmur (2004) go one step further; they support the idea that mainstream institutions should encourage language shift and not provide support for language maintenance. On the other hand, ethnic minority groups’ themselves have the responsibility to protect their culture and language by setting up their own institutions to transmit their culture, norms and values to the next generation. However, this research will not focus on ethnolinguistic vitality as a subjective approach but as a scale existed in an adopted questionnaire of language maintenance and shift from dr. Yagmur and dr. Van der Vijver (2012). Edwards (1992) introduces a list of different perspectives and variables regarding the factors that influence language maintenance and shift. Those factors regarding Edwards (1992) can be summarized as follows; (a) demography, (b) sociology, (c) linguistics, (d) psychology (e) history (f) politics/law/government (g) geography (h) education (i) religion (j) economics (k) media. Additionally, in his typology framework combines those variables with the variables of language, speaker and setting. Each of these variables influence and play a major role regarding the language use and choice. Additionally, Kipp et al. (1996) discuss the factors affecting the language maintenance and shift; birthplace, age, gender, education/qualifications, reason for migration, period of residence, marriage patterns are the most important variables mentioned. All these factors indicate different perspectives for approaching language maintenance and shift issues. Those factors will be analytically discussed and analyzed. A strong relationship is assumed between age, birthplace and L1 or L2 language acquisition. For instance immigrants who were born in the country of origin are more likely to maintain L1 instead of L2. Additionally, there is a greater language shift in the second generation than in the first generation. Gender is another factor which plays a major role on language maintenance. Kipp et al. (1996) claim that females are more likely to maintain the L1 than males, because the males are more likely to marry females outside their own ethnic group. In line with this, the marriage patterns could also give very useful information. For instance, how important is the role of family in maintenance of L1. How the exogamy and endogamy could influence the language learning process of Armenian students.

The type of marriage, whether with partners of the same ethnicity or partners with different cultural background, might affect children’s language use patterns. Additionally, the period of residence with settlement patterns and family networks is another factor which may have an effect on language maintenance. The duration of exposure to the second language and the region of residence in which L1 or L2 is more widely used are some important components that influence the processes of language maintenance and shift. Education has been identified as another variable in language maintenance and shift studies. Education is an ambivalent factor that may result in a faster shift to L2 or in greater maintenance of L1. Finally, the reason of migration is also reported to be one of the most important and ambivalent factors involved in language maintenance or shift. If immigrants have positive feelings towards the hosted country, their language patterns are more likely to positively get influenced. On the other hand, when immigrant have negative attitude towards the hosted country the group boundaries are more explicit. In this respect, language maintenance is more likely to be achieved. Bağci (2012) agrees that the attitudes and the policies of the mainstream society towards the immigrants have a huge impact on the acculturation orientations of the immigrants. Not only immigrants but also the mainstream society experiences this acculturation process. For instance, learning each other’s language or gets influenced from each other’s’ food, preference or norms and values. There is a mutual interaction between people living in the same cultural context. The outcome of this interaction might vary; immigrants are possible whether assimilate in the mainstream society or whether separate or marginalize. Berry (1997), Bourhis, Moise, Perreault& Senecal (1997), Verkuyten & Thijs (2002), Arends-Toth (2003), distinguish four acculturation strategies; integration, assimilation, separation and marginalization. During the integration process the immigrants maintain the core values of their culture as well as they try to adopt the norms of the mainstream society. In the assimilation strategy immigrants gradually give up their culture in order to adapt the one of the mainstream society. In separation strategy, immigrants mostly maintain their own norms and values and reject the ones of the host society. Finally, the marginalization strategy refers to the rejection of the mainstream society and of immigrants’ culture. In line with this theory, Baker (2001) defines assimilation as a belief which cultural groups should give up their culture, heritage and identity and adopt the norms and the values of the host society. There are different types of assimilation; cultural, social, civic, linguistic. The linguistic assimilation according to Wiley & Wright (2004) has two broad goals; ‘deculturation to achieve subordination and acculturation to promote absorption’ Language attitudes have a long history of research (Baker, 1992; Edwards, 1999) in the area of linguistics, sociolinguistics and applied linguistics. Fazio & Olson (2003) distinguish between cognitive, affective and behavioral language attitudes. Those three dimensions play a major role to attitude formations. In migration contexts language attitude studies distinguish between the attitudes regarding the mother tongue and the attitudes regarding the language of the host society. In migration contexts,

language attitudes studies include the following dimensions from two perspectives; 1) from immigrants perspective: (a) the “heritage” language and its maintenance, (b) the host’s community’s dominant language (c) the host community’s accent (d) immigrants’ own proficiency and accent (e) learning other languages (f) multilingualism (g) other immigrants languages and dialects (h) local indigenous minority languages (i) global linguae francae (j) the vitality of immigrants’ language in the immigrant context or in their home country. 2) from host’s community perspective: (a)multilingualism (b) the immigrants’ languages, use, accent, style, ethnolect (c) the vitality of immigrants’ language in the host community and (d) other immigrant and indigenous minorities’ attitudes towards immigrant languages and their speakers. Fishman (1964) claims that the study of language maintenance and shift may guide from general theories of personal, social, cultural and ethnic changes. There are different models of explaining and analyzing issues of language maintenance and shift. Finally, Identity is an important component of this theoretical framework. Identity is a complex and multiple concept. The concept of identity has been used in a range of multidisciplinary studies. Brubaker & Cooper (2000), mention that identity does not really exist, it is a “catch-up” term to present individuals self-perception. Gergen (1991) on the other hand conceptualized identity as a flux definition. Adams & Marchal (1996) claim that identity provide an understanding to the individuals of who they are; their values, goals, beliefs, commitments and choices. Verkuyten (2005) suggest that in the concept of identity words such as ‘stability’ , ‘unity’, ‘certainty’ and ‘essence’ have been replaced with words such as ‘variability’, ‘multiple’, ‘fragmentation’, ‘uncertainty’ and ‘ambivalence’. Identity is not a cut clear fixed issue but it is vulnerable to changes. Verkuyten (2005) proposes a three- layered model of identity; the individual, the interactional and the societal level. The first level is defined in terms of personal characteristics and personal self-understanding. The second one refers to the maintenance of identity in terms of daily inter-individual contacts under different situations. Finally, the last level refers to the historical, political, economic and social features. The underlying concept of this multilayered model is that society and individuals influence deeply and greatly each other. This model allows the investigation of the influence, interaction and interrelationship among the three levels. Identity as Erikson (1950) reflected is a synthesis of personal, cultural and social dimensions. Schwartz, Zamboanga &Weisskirch (2008) define personal identity as the preferences of an individual in the area of politics, religion or family and friendships. Cultural identity is defined in terms of group belongingness (Jensen, 2003). Finally, Korostelina (2007) defines social identity in terms of group similarities and out- group differences. Those similarities are defined as a set of personality traits, physical characteristics, personal aspirations and experiences as well as skills and abilities. In group similar characteristics create feelings of belongingness, cohesion and solidarity. On the other hand, out- group differences create feelings of isolation and marginalization. Ethnic identity is part of the wider and more encompassing definition of cultural identity. Extra &Yagmur (2004) claim that not only the ethnic identity of the minority group is important but also the ethnic

identity of the majority group and the national identity as well. Bağci (2012) mentions that ethnic identity has to do with the meaning of ‘emotional allegiance to a particular group’. People usually fell insecure when their ethnic identity is under threat. Finally, the question that arises here is whether and in which ways language choice and use is associated with individuals’ identity construction. Researchers have been analyzing how people’s languages and ways of speaking not only reflect who they are but also make them who they are (Llamas& Watt, 2010). Language is a strong indicator both for self-identification and for individuals’ identification with a group of people. The relationship between language and identity is a very solid. The Research Methodology part will attempt to illustrate and highlight this relationship.

CHAPTER 4

Research Methodology

In line with the theoretical background documented in the previous session of this paper, the methodology of the current study is presented in this chapter. This study combines both the quantitative and the qualitative research approaches. The combination of those two methods is important in this study since a deeper knowledge and understanding of the historical, social, linguistic and sociolinguistic factors of language maintenance and shift in the two Armenian communities in Athens and in Istanbul is needed. The combination of qualitative and quantitative study counts several advantages. For instance, quantitative study concerns issues of reliability and the nature of generalizability. The purpose of reliability is to check whether a statement belongs to the participant or it is a product of interpretation by the researcher. The reliability has been guaranteed since through the surveys I had no space for personal interpretations. The aim of quantitative research is to identify general patterns and relationships. One of the methods of quantitative research is the surveys. In this research, I used an already tested and standardized survey questionnaire (Yagmur& van de Vijver, 2012) in order to document the language use, choice and attitudes of two Armenian communities in Athens and Istanbul. In this way, I was able to identify patterns of language maintenance and shift. An analytic overview of the instruments used in the survey is provided below in a separate sub- paragraph. Additionally, by means of interviews, which are embedded in the method of qualitative research, I was able to document the social and linguistic construction of two respective groups as well as explore, describe, understand and analyze the experiences and responses of particular individuals and groups in particular contexts. I attempted to explore the two communities and the wider social space in which these two communities exist with utmost care, respect and attention.

4.1. Research Question:

In the present study, an attempt will be made to find an answer on the following main research questions and the sub-questions

What are the similarities and differences in language maintenance and shift patterns of Armenian communities in Athens and Istanbul?

Sub-questions:

- In what ways do language maintenance efforts differ in two respective communities? - Do Armenian informants’ language use and choice patterns differ in public and private domains in Athens? - Do Armenian informants’ language use and choice patterns differ in public and private domains in Istanbul?

- Are there any differences between language attitudes of Armenian-Greeks and Armenian-Turks? - What is the extent of in -and out-group identification among Armenians in Athens? - What is the extent of in -and out-group identification among Armenians in Istanbul? - What is the extent of social interaction between Armenians and the Greek? - What is the extent of social interaction between Armenians and the Turks?

The research question and the sub-questions have been selected since they will provide an outline, a framework to investigate issues of language maintenance and shift since those are highly relevant for understanding the dynamics of language maintenance and shift. In addition, to explore the differences between the two countries, the domains of language use and ethnic identification will be examined.

4.2. Research Design

Survey data can be used to make comparisons, to show change and to describe the status of things (Fink &Kosecoff, 1998). There are two designs in the survey method; the cross-sectional survey design and the longitudinal design. This research used the cross-sectional survey design in order to investigate the language use patterns of the two Armenian communities. With this design, data was collected at a single point in time. This design method has several advantages. First, it describes the things as they are. As a result, the researcher has the opportunity to plan everything in advance. In this respect, firstly, I adapted an already existing survey questionnaire to use with the two communities in Athens and Istanbul. Furthermore, next to the questionnaires I used semi-structured interviews in order to highlight the insights and the experiences of the participants. In this respect, I first delivered the surveys to the parents and to the students living within the Armenian communities in Athens and in Istanbul. The students who participated to the survey were older than fourteen years old. Moreover, during the interviews with the directors of the Armenian schools we discussed the issue of Armenian students who do not attend the Armenian schools but the schools of the mainstream society. In this respect, I had the opportunity to approach this issue from a different perspective. Additionally, besides students and parents, members of both Armenian communities had the chance to fill in the questionnaire. I approached the members of the Armenian community mainly by the cultural institutions of both communities. Through the surveys important issues came up to the surface; the extent that pupils speak L1 or L2 at home and in education, the influence of marriage patterns in language maintenance and the shift issues, the degree of language maintenance within the cultural institutions of the community and so forth. In total, 199 informants participated to the survey; 99 informants in Athens and 100 informants in Istanbul. Therefore, with the semi-structured interviews more qualitative data was available which provided a deeper knowledge and understanding. In this respect, I interviewed the directors of the Armenian schools both in Athens and in Istanbul regarding their experiences in the school and members from the cultural institutions in order to highlight their major role in the language maintenance and shift

issues. During the various interviews, the notion of identity turned out to be a fundamental part of this research. In general, interviews captured the opinions of the Armenians living in Athens and in Istanbul. Additionally, during the interviews important experiences of the daily life of the informants came up. Interviewees had the opportunity to talk openly about their life, discuss issues of language maintenance and shift, ethnic identification, social interaction with the rest Armenians and also with the people of the hosted society; Greek and Turks. In total, I conducted 16 interviews; eight in Athens and eight in Istanbul.

4.3. Data Collection

In order to arrive at a thorough understanding of the factors influencing the language choice and use in the two respective Armenian communities I used the survey of Language, Culture & Identity adapted from the research conducted by Yagmur and Van de Vijver (2012) regarding the Turkish immigrants in Australia, France, Germany and the Netherlands. This survey documented issues of ethnic identity, the role of social networks in the two respective Armenian communities and the most important Armenian-Greek and Armenian-Turkish attitudes regarding issues of language choice and use. The data was collected through large scale questionnaires since the survey was applicable to 100 informants in Istanbul and 99 informants in Athens. The questionnaire consists of four parts. The first part was designed to provide some background information of the participants. The second part was designed to assess the participants’ opinion towards Armenian and mainstream identity. The third part covered the issue of social networks. In this part the concept of ethnolinguistic vitality existed as a scale as in the adopted questionnaire and not as a separate subjective questionnaire. Nevertheless, the scale of ethnolinguistic vitality provided useful information regarding the way that Armenians maintain their ethnic and linguistic vitality both in Athens and in Istanbul. Finally, the fourth part measured the language choice and language use patterns between Armenians of Turkey and Armenians of Greece. Additionally, interviews took place for a deeper insight and understanding. The questionnaires were available to the participants in bilingual form. In this respect, the members of the Armenian community in Athens had the opportunity to select to fill in the questionnaire whether in Armenian or Greek whereas the members of the Armenian community in Istanbul had the opportunity to fill it in whether in Armenian or Turkish. The underlying concept of the bilingual form was to give the chance to the participants to fill in the questionnaire in their dominant language in order the answers come out more naturally. This is counted as one of the major advantages of this research.

4.4. Data Analysis

This sub paragraph describes how quantitative and qualitative methods were analyzed and evaluated after the data collection. After conducting the survey, I analyzed the data and combined it with the interview findings. This research used concrete and valid statistical instruments in order to measure and investigate the sub questions

analyzed above and finally answer the main research question. The data was stored in a statistical package program and the data analysis was carried out through SPSS program. I used both descriptive statistics and advanced procedures to analyze the data. Each section in the questionnaire refers to a scale, such as language use or ethnic identification. By adding the individual scores, a group score for each scale was obtained. These scale scores were compared regarding the city of the informants; Athens and Istanbul. First an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to find out the differences between the Armenians living in Athens and the Armenians living in Istanbul. Via ANOVA-test I had the opportunity to test whether the differences between those communities are real and not by any chance. Additionally, after collecting the qualitative data the question that arose was “What we are doing when we analyze”?

The ‘temporal quality’ of human experiences it is presented in descriptive and narrative forms. When we analyze, we often stop the flow of the ‘sequential presentation’ and lift an element out from the whole to inspect it more closely (Atkinson, 1992, p.13).

In this respect, in order to ‘lift these necessary elements’ coding and categorizing is the starting point in order to take the step from the log entries or interview transcripts to more specific clusters and patterns. This is a beginning process, helping the researcher to notice the similarities and the differences in the data and the variety of relationships and patterns within and among codes (Ely, Anzul, Friedman, Garner & Steinmetz, 1991). However, those codes are difficult to be defined and categorized. Carolyn Arnason describes it as follows:

The circular nature of recursive ruminating has really highlighted, for me, the different world of qualitative research. I found with the qualitative research process there always had to be backward glances, if not long, deep looks.

The method which is selected to categorize and describe those codes is the analysis of themes which is a one of the most frequently mentioned analytic approaches used by qualitative researchers (Ely et al., 1991). Tesch (1987) claims in order to deal with the massive amount of data ‘researchers “search” for themes, and they “find” themes, or they “extract”, “recognize” or “identify” them’. The question is, although, what is the theme? A theme can be defined as (a) a statement of meaning that carries a heavy emotional or factual impact (Ely et al., 1991, p.150) or (b) brief statements that describe the content of individuals units of data text (Ely et al., 1991, p.150). In this research, the selected themes attempted to capture the most important information and highlight the insights and the experiences of the participants. There are five themes that I “find”, “extract”, “recognize” and “identify” and they are categorized as follows; in the first theme some demographic information for the Armenian communities in Athens and Istanbul will be presented, followed by some information regarding education. In this second theme the Armenian schools in both cultural contexts will be presented as well as all the issues and problems that

arose during the interviews with the directors of the Armenian schools in Athens and in Istanbul. In the third theme, Armenian media and its influence in the two mainstream societies of Athens and Istanbul in Greece and Turkey respectively will be discussed. Additionally, fourth theme will provide information concerning religious matters and marriage patterns and finally fifth theme will conclude with the findings regarding the sociocultural Armenian institutions and organizations in both cultural contexts. It is noteworthy to mention that all these themes will have as a common point the emphasis in the patterns of language use, choice and preference. Through those categories, those issues will come out naturally and the combination of all will be presented in the discussion part. Finally, concerning the method is noteworthy that categorizing the data is a mechanical process and it requires a continuous exercise of judgment. In this respect, an established category that will occur from the process of categorization is not a cast in stone, but a subject of continual adjustment and revitalization through the continuous interaction with the data (Dey, 1993). Afterwards, the qualitative and the quantitative research results were combined and presented as a whole.

4.5. Survey Instrument

In my research I used an already tested and standardized survey questionnaire (Yagmur& van de Vijver, 2012) in order to document the language use, choice and attitudes of two Armenian communities in Athens and Istanbul as well as to investigate issues of ethnic identification, ethnolinguistic vitality and social networking. The first part of the questionnaire was designed to gather some background personal information through 11 questions on gender, country of birth of person, partner and parents, years of residence in the host country, city of residence, education; received (diploma), profession and marital status.

4.5.1 Ethnic Identification Scale

A two-dimensional ethnic identification scale included three sub-sections with a total of 21 questions. In the first question the informant was welcomed to choose an answer from the four given choices concerning her/him ethnic identification. The choices were formulated as follow:

1) Different people live in Turkey. To which group do you think you belong to?

 The Armenian group  The Turkish group  Both Armenian and Turkish  Other, namely: ………………………………………

The second and third questions were in an endorsement format using five-point Likert scales:

I I don’tagree Neutral I agree I definitelydon’t definitelyagree agree

2) I feel Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

3) I feel Turkish 1 2 3 4 5

In order to examine the reasons contributing to feeling Armenian or Turkish, 10 questions for Armenian identification and 8 questions for Turkish identification were formulated. The questions were almost the same but the Armenian identification ones also included questions of religious identification.

4.5.2. Ethnic and mainstream cultural identity

The scale consists of 18 questions designed to assess the informants’ opinion towards Armenian and mainstream identity. All the questions had an endorsement format that begun with (1)I definitely don’t agree and ends with (5) I definitely agree. For instance, the scale included questions such as “I am proud that I am Armenian” and “I am happy that I am Turkish”. The section ended with the question “All in all, do you feel more Armenian or more Turkish?” with the same endorsement format.

4.5.3. Armenian and mainstream behavior scale

The scale consists of 22 endorsement format questions designed to assess (a) attitudes toward Armenian and mainstream culture (b) the extend that informants associate themselves with the Armenian and the mainstream group and (c) informants’ preferences concerning music, food, activities and media. For instance, informants were welcome to rate statements such as “I live in accordance with Armenian cultural norms and values” or “I know Turkish social customs, rules and norms of cultural behavior” on 5 –point Likert-scale ranging from (1) I definitely don’ t agree to (5) I definitely agree.

4.5.4. Armenian and mainstream social networking

The scale consists of 23 endorsement type questions designed to investigate the degree of informants’ interaction with the Armenian and the mainstream group. The participants were asked to rate the statements once more on 5 –point Likert-scale ranging in terms of how strongly they agree or disagree with statements such as“I have many Armenian friends whom I can call real friends” or “When I need help in my daily life, I ask help from Turkish friends”. The section ended with the question

“All in all are you more in contact with Armenian or Turkish people”? with a five point response scale from (1) only Armenian to (5) only Turkish.

4.5.5. The ethnolinguistic vitality scale

This scale consists of 19 endorsement type questions designed to assess the attitudes of the informants regarding a) the norms and the values of the Armenian and the mainstream group b) informants’ perceptions regarding the vitality of the two respective groups c) the degree of institutional support and d) the degree of exclusion or support that informants’ experience in their daily in the mainstream society. The informant were welcomed to rate the statements from (1) I definitely don’t agree to (5) I definitely agree.

4.5.6. The language use, choice and preference scale

The scale consists of 30 questions in 4 sub-sections on a) the language register in interaction with different interlocutors, for instance mother, father, siblings and friends b) the language register spoken to the informant c) language use and d) language preference. The informants were welcomed to answer the questions such as “In which language do you interact mostly with your mother” with answers such as (1) always Turkish to (5) always Armenian.

4.5.7. Armenian language importance scale

This scale consists of 14 questions designed to assess attitudes towards Armenian language in various domains. The informants were welcomed to rate the statements on a 5- point Likert-scale ranging from (1) only Turkish is important to (5) only Armenian is important. Some examples of the statements are; “How important is Armenian to find a job in Turkey” or “How important is Armenian to have a better education in Turkey”?

4.5.8. Language preference scale

This scale consists of 6 statements designed to assess the language that informants find more pleasure or more distinguish. The informants for once more were welcomed to rate the statements from (1) only Turkish to (5) only Armenian.

4.6. Interviewees Profile

In total, in this research 16 interviewees agreed to conduct an interview with me; 8 in Athens and 8 in Istanbul. In the table below informants’ gender, their profession within the community and a code in order to protect their anonymity are presented.

Gender Profession Informant Code Male Director of School A ATH01 Female Director of School B ATH02 Male Director of School C ATH03

Female Head Editor of the Armenian daily newspaper ATH04 ‘Azad Or’ Male Armenian Assembly’s director ATH05 Male Armenian Ethnic Committee director ATH06 Female Director of one of the offices of ‘Gabouid Hach’ ATH07 Male A priest of an Armenian Church ATH08 Female Director of School A IST01 Female Director of School B IST02 Female Director of School C IST03 Male A priest in the Armenian Patriarch IST04 Male The head-editor of the bilingual newspaper IST05 ‘Agos’ Male An editor in charge in the publishing house IST06 ‘Aras’ Male A columnist in ‘Agos’, organizing conferences IST07 and workshops spreading Armenianness in diaspora Male The contact person in Istanbul IST08

In this respect, 6 females and 10 males participated in this research. Each of them shared with me valuable experiences and insights regarding their daily activities and their lives within the Armenian community. All interviews were conducted in Armenian language. However, in Athens some words or sentences were used in Greek. When an interviewee, wanted to express her/his feelings or thoughts in Greek she/he had the chance to do so in order to be more clear and explicit. In Istanbul, due to my lack of competence in Turkish language interviewees expressed themselves only in the Armenian language.

4.7. Sample Strategy

The sampling method applied in this research is the purposive sampling. In this study, the participants had been selected based on their ethnicity (Armenian) and their functionality within the community. In addition, their role and their functionality within the boundaries of the community were examined. I interviewed Armenian members of those communities involved in the different activities of the institutions allocated within those communities (school, church, newspapers and cultural activities representatives’). First of all, I contacted the daily newspaper in Athens. The director of the newspaper welcomed me in her office where I was able to gather a big amount of literature regarding the construction and function of Armenian community in Greece. Second, the director of the newspaper agreed to conduct an interview with me. Third, I arranged an appointment with the directors of the Armenian schools in Athens to make a survey to the students above fourteen years old as well as to interview the directors. Additionally, since I wanted to analyze religious matters and marriage patterns I interviewed a priest of an Armenian church. Finally, I interviewed an amount of people from the Armenian organizations in Athens.

In Istanbul I had a contact person who kindly offered to arrange some appointments for me during my stay in Istanbul. In Istanbul, after my first days I was able to create some personal contacts. I visited the bilingual Turkish- Armenian newspaper called ‘Agos’. In ‘Agos’ I left some questionnaires and I also interviewed the head- editor and the only founder left of the newspaper. In addition, I visited the publication center called ‘Aras’. In ‘Aras’ we discussed extensively about the role of the Armenian books in the Armenian community in Istanbul. Moreover, I visited three out of 19 Armenian schools in Istanbul. In those schools I also had the opportunity to leave some questionnaires as well as to conduct some interviews with the directors of the schools. Finally, I interviewed members of the Armenian community in Istanbul and I also participated in several cultural activities within the community in order to find participants for my survey. The results will be presented in the results chapter separately. In this research, I attempted to find equal number of interviewees and participants in the survey. The surveys and the interviews try to highlight the domains of language use across various institutions and the people who attend those institutions. The sample attempts to be representative in order to achieve the assessment of language used in each of these institutions.

4.8. Research quality indicators

The indicators which are used to increase the quality of the research can be summarized as follows: Reliability: The aim of reliability is to make the data more transparent (Flick, 2007). The purpose of reliability is to check whether a statement belongs to the interviewee or it is a product of interpretation by the researcher. In quantitative studies the reliability is ensured through concrete and valid statistical tools and instruments which are described above. In this research, statistical analysis based on quantitative data took place in order to ensure reliability. Through SPSS program I was able to statistically measure the reliability by using C-alpha test control. In addition, in the qualitative method of interviews the reliability will be guaranteed since the interviews will be transcribed in detail and the quotations will be clearly captured during the transcription. Internal Validity: Ketchen& Bergh (2004) state that the researchers occasionally fail to control one or more threats of internal validity. Researchers have to be always doubtful for their methods applied in the research and do not hesitate changing and reevaluating them if the threat of internal validity is present. The method of the semi structured interviews aimed to ensure the highest possible level of internal validity since I had a guide during the interviews of what should be discussed and how it should be discussed. In addition, the fact that I conducted all the interviews in Armenian gave extra points to the concept of internal validity since the participants felt more open and secure to give information to me with who they share the same language. Using only the Armenian language both in Athens and in Istanbul the cultural influences were eliminated. In addition, using only Armenian I was able to check the proficiency of speakers in both communities.

External Validity: The threats in internal validity are also present in the case of external validity. The researcher has to be aware of these in order to confront them. The researcher has the role to judge whether the findings are generalizable or not (Flick, 2007). The findings in this research were generalized since one of the advantages of conducting a quantitative research is the tool that the researcher has to generalize the findings. Objectivity: The method of semi-structured interviews as well as the surveys which took place within the school context did not leave much room to me to express my own insights and experiences. This was achieved by the construction of a coding manual in order to avoid the personal biases. The semi-structured interviews aimed to investigate the experiences of the participants in the way that they feel and live them in their everyday life.

CHAPTER 5

Results

In line with the theoretical background and the methodological framework, the results of the survey and of the interviews are presented in this chapter. Two communities of Armenians are included in this study in two different cultural contexts; Athens and Istanbul. This survey aims to investigate issues of ethnic identification, cultural identity, social networking, ethnolinguistic vitality and last but not least the patterns of language use, choice and preference. In section 5.1 background characteristics of the informants are given.

5.1.Background Information Table 5.1: Gender distribution in Istanbul and Athens Istanbul Athens Total Female 50 52 102 Male 49 45 94 Missing 1 2 3 Total 100 99 199

As shown in Table 5.1, the participation in this study of female and male both in Athens and in Istanbul was almost the same. Birth country data of informants and their parents is presented in Tables 5.2. and 5.2.1.

Table 5.2: Birth country of informants in Istanbul Informant Father Mother Turkey 97 (97%) 98 (98%) 96 (96%)

Other 2 (2%) 1 (1%) 3 (3%) Missing 1(1%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%) Total 100 100 100

Table 5.2.1.: Birth country informants in Athens

Informant Father Mother

Armenia 7 (7, 1%) 8 (8, 1%) 9 (9, 1%)

Greece 77 (77, 8%) 54 (54, 5%) 58 (58, 6%)

Other 14 (14, 1%) 36 (36, 4%) 31 (31, 3 %)

Missing 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%)

Total 99 (100%) 99 (100%) 99 (100%)

The majority of informants (97%) in Istanbul report Turkey as their birth country; the same pattern is repeated for their father (98%) and mother (96%). Additionally, none of the informants in Istanbul is born in Armenia. However, there is a big

differentiation regarding the informants in Athens. Only 7, 1% of the participants were born in Armenia, 77, 8% was born in Greece and 14,1% was born in other country, usually in Syria. Regarding parents, a respectful number of informants (36,4%) and (31,3%) report that their father and mother were born in other country respectively. In maintaining language use patterns and cultural practices both the birth country of the informants as well as the birth country of their parents and partners is a relevant indicator, which is why information on the partner’s birth country is presented below.

Table 5.3: Partners’ birth country for informants in Istanbul

Number of married Partners born in Partners born in Turkey Partners born in informants Armenia other countries

28 1 (1%) 27 (99%) 0

Table 5.3.1: Partners’ birth country for informants in Athens

Number of married Partners born in Partners born in Greece Partners born in

informants Armenia other countries

50 11 (22%) 25 (50%) 14 (28%)

Half of the married informants in Athens (50%) reported that their partner is born in Greece while the other half reported that their partner is born in Armenia or in other country. However, almost all the married informants in Istanbul (99%) reported Turkey as their partner birth country. In most studies, on language maintenance and shift as well as identity and culture, education proves to be an ambivalent factor. There are differences in attitudes between high-educated and less-educated informants. Yagmur& Van der Vijver (2001) claim that better educated immigrants tend to adopt the cultural values of the host society much faster than less educated informants. However, this might not be the case since Armenians in Istanbul do not consider themselves immigrants or diasporic but they consider Istanbul their homeland. Nevertheless, education is always an important and relevant factor regarding issues of language, culture and identity. In this respect, in order to bring out the effect of education, informants from different educational backgrounds are included in this study. The educational profile of the informants is presented in Table 5.4. The majority of the contacts in Athens are university graduated, since most of the people who were willing to participate to my survey were teachers in schools, directors, editors in newspapers and managers in high positions. On the other hand, in Istanbul the amount of secondary education student informants was bigger than in Athens.

Table 5.4: Educational level for informants both in Istanbul and Athens

Educational Level Informants in Istanbul Informants in Athens

Primary 23 (23%) 16 (16, 2%)

Secondary 26 (26%) 7 (7, 1%)

High Education 13 (13%) 35 (35, 4%)

Higher Education 34 (34%) 34 (29, 3%)

Missing 4 (4%) 7 (34,4%)

99 100%) Total 100(100%)

5.2.Ethnic identification

In this study is important to investigate informants’ ethnic identification with their ethnic group and with the mainstream society. In this respect, the focus is on the feeling of belongingness and solidarity and the sense of shared values towards informants’ ethnic groups.

5.2.1. Self- Identification

Table 5.5.: Self Identification Feeling Armenian Informants in Istanbul Informants in Athens

I definitely do NOT agree 1 (1%) 0 I do not agree 2 (2%) 0 Neutral 3 (3%) 4(4%) I agree 18 (18%) 28(28, 3%) I definitely agree 76 (76%) 67(67, 7%) Total 100 00%) 99 (100%)

5.2.2. Identification with the mainstream society

Table 5.6.: Identification with the mainstream society Feeling Turkish Informants in Istanbul I definitely do NOT agree 56 (56%) I do not agree 22 (22%) Neutral 9 (9%) I agree 2 (2%) I definitely agree 2 (2%) Missing 9 (9%) Total 100 (100%)

Feeling Greek Informants in Athens I definitely do NOT agree 9(9, 1%) I do not agree 8(8, 1%) Neutral 11(11, 1%) I agree 28(28, 3%) I definitely agree 31(31, 3%) Missing 12(12, 1%) Total 99(100%)

As seen in Table 5.5., there is a strong sense of ethnic identification among Armenians in Istanbul. The majority (76%) of the informants in Istanbul report that they value high their Armenianness. This fact might be expected since Korostelina (2007) claim that ‘as soon as people recognize similarities in perception and evaluation of the world with other group members, they feel stronger positive emotional connection with the group’. Armenians in Istanbul have a strong sense of belongingness. This sense of belongingness creates feelings of security and solidarity. They feel Armenian and they protect their ethnic identity. However, only the 2% of the Armenian informants in Istanbul identify themselves as Turkish and 78% refused to be identified as one. This is not the case in Athens where almost 60% of the Armenian informants agreed or absolutely agreed to be identified as Greek. Finally, Armenians in Athens also value high their Armenianness where 67, 7 % presented themselves as Armenians. An Anova test was employed to bring out the differences betweenArmenians in Athens and in Istanbul regarding their ethnic identification. Before presenting the combined results of Armenian and mainstream ethnic identification, cultural identity, social networking and ethnolinguistic vitality scores a C-alpha test was carried out in order to measure the reliability of the different combined scales in Athens and in Istanbul.

(N=199) Scale Name C-alpha Armenian ethnic identification ,82 Mainstream ethnic identification ,86 Armenian cultural identity ,66 Mainstream cultural identity ,80 Armenian cultural norms and values ,85 Mainstream cultural norms and values ,86 Ethnolinguistic Vitality ,83 Armenian social networks ,86 Mainstream social networks ,68 Armenian language use with different interlocutors ,91 Armenian language use of different interlocutors ,91 Armenian language choice for different activities ,95 Armenian language preference for express feelings ,96 Armenian language importance ,93

5.2.3. Combined Armenian and mainstream identification

Table 5.7.: Armenian and mainstream identification in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian Identification Athens 93 39.24 6.34 13.08 .000

Istanbul 91 42.60 6.28

Mainstream Identification Athens 83 27.28 6.97

65.74 .000 Istanbul 74 19.24 5.21

As can be seen in table 5.7.there is a significant difference between Armenian informants in Athens and in Istanbul both regarding their Armenian and mainstream identification. On the one hand, Armenians living in Istanbul show stronger feelings of Armenian ethnic identity than informants in Athens do. On the other hand, Armenian informants living in Athens show strongfeelings of attachment to their Greek ethnic identity whereas informantsin Istanbul show very weak feelings of attachment to their Turkish ethnic identity. Ethnic identification seems to have more explanatory power in Istanbul than in Athens. In this respect, Armenians in Istanbul are closely affiliated and committed with the Armenian ethnic group as well have strong feelings of belongingness and a sense of shared values and positive attitudes towards Armenian’s ethnic group. Consequently, the cultural distance between Armenian and Turkish groups, the strong distinction of Armenian community in the context of culture and religion might have an effect to the fortification of group boundaries.

5.3.Cultural Identity Culture is a complex issue and has many definitions. Schwartz, Montgomery & Briones (2008) claim that cultural identity answers the questions Who am I as a member of my group, and in relation to other groups? An Anova test regarding the Armenian cultural identity was employed to bring out the cultural practices that define the cultural identity of the informants.

Table 5.8.: Armenian and mainstream cultural identity in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p

Armenian cultural identity Athens 93 34.47 3.63 3.65 .057

Istanbul 89 33.14 5.56

Mainstream cultural Athens 90 24.12 5.26 identity 116.28 .000

Istanbul 78 15.53 5.00

As seen in Table 5.8.Armenian cultural identity scale got very high scores, showing Armenians high esteem for their Armenian cultural identity in both cultural contexts. However, Turkish identification scale got quite low scores. There is a significant difference between Armenians living in Athens and in Istanbul. The former, have a very low level of identification with Turkish cultural practices whereas Armenians in Athens have quite high level of identification with Greek cultural practices. In this respect, we can say that in contrast to their identification with Armenian cultural practices, Armenian informants in Istanbul have a very low level of identification with Turkish cultural practices whereas Armenians in Athens alongside to their identification with Armenian cultural practices show a descent level of identification with their Greek cultural identity.

5.4.Cultural norms and values

Cultural norms and values are important dimension of cultural identity. An Anova test was carried out to investigate the differences for Armenian and mainstream cultural norms and behavior within the two different cultural contexts of Athens and Istanbul.

Table 5.9.: Armenian and mainstream cultural norms and values in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p

Armenian cultural norms Athens 94 42.92 6.78 3.31 .070

Istanbul 92 41.05 7.23

Mainstream cultural Athens 90 39.76 6.31 norms 85.96 .000

Istanbul 85 30.48 6.93

Compared to Armenian informants in Istanbul, informants in Athens indicate that they are more familiar with the mainstream cultural norms, values, social rules and traditions. There is a significant difference towards Armenians living in Athens and in Istanbul. Armenians in Istanbul show significantly less attachment to their Turkish cultural values than the Armenians in Athens with their Greek cultural values. However, there is not a significant difference between Athens and Istanbul regarding the Armenian cultural norms. Armenians in both cultural contexts reported high familiarity with Armenian tradition, behavior and society rules.

5.5.Social Network

Social Networks are important component of integration in the mainstream society. When a community member interacts with the mainstream society through education or work and through different social and cultural activities, the chances of sociocultural integration increase. In order to understand and gain an insight for sociocultural integration patterns is important to investigate the social contacts of Armenian communities’ members. An Anova test was carried out to examine Armenians social networks in Athens and in Istanbul.

Table 5.10.: Armenian and mainstream social network in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian social network Athens 95 47.81 7.41 4.57 .034

Istanbul 89 50.05 6.79

Mainstream social Athens 93 38.92 7.02 network 29.94 .000 Istanbul 92 33.05 7.55

Armenians in both cultural contexts seem to have lots of Armenian friends. However, as can be seen in Table 5.10., there is a significant difference between Armenians in Athens and in Istanbul regarding mainstream social networks.Armenians in Athens are more oriented towards mainstream social networks than Armenians in Istanbul. In this respect, we can conclude that besides the fact that Armenians in Turkey have Turkish friends and they are fully integrated in the Turkish society they score lower regarding Armenian informants in Athens who seem to stay more in touch with the members of the mainstream society. If we combine the findings of social networking with the ones of ethnic identification, cultural identity and cultural norms and values we might conclude that Armenians in Athens are more attached to the ‘mainstream’ identity, they identify themselves more as ‘mainstream’, they have a better knowledge of ‘mainstream’ cultural norms, values, social rules and attitudes and finally they are more in contact with the members of the mainstream society than Armenians in Turkey.

5.6. Ethnolinguistic Vitality

Ethnolinguistic vitality is very important factor in this survey. Ethnolinguistic vitality could be high, medium or low. Low vitality groups are more likely to go through linguistic assimilation than high vitality groups (Bourhis, Giles & Rosenthal, 1981). Armenian informants both in Athens and in Istanbul were surveyed on the basis of 19

statements for evaluating status, institutional support as well as for the attitudes of the mainstream society towards Armenian language, religion and culture. Table 5.11.presents the attitudes of Armenian-Greeks and Armenian-Turkish with regard the issue of ethnolinguistic vitality.

Table 5.11.: Armenian maintenance of ethnolinguistic vitality in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian Athens 93 64.98 7.11 ethnolinguistic vitality 2.73 .100 Istanbul 86 63.08 8.31

The findings in Table 5.11.shows that both communities reported quite high Armenian vitality perceptions. However, it is noteworthy that Armenians living in Athens share the same religion with the people of the host society. However, Armenians living in Istanbul have different religion from the people of the host society. In this respect, the feeling of protecting and promoting their different religion is much stronger in Istanbul than in Athens. In this respect, one would expect a much higher difference between Armenians in Athens and in Istanbul concerning ethnolinguistic vitality. The findings reported in Table 5.11. do not support this expectation since there is no significant difference between Armenians in Athens and in Istanbul.

5.7.Language use, choice and preference

Language use, choice and preference are a fundamental part of this research. The variables in this scale show in which extent the informants use Armenian language or alternatively the language of the mainstream society in their daily life and with the people that they interact most. In addition, informants were invited to evaluate in which extent they consider Armenian language an important factor of integration inthe mainstream society. Table 5.12.and 5.13.show the language that informants in Istanbul use with the people that they interact in their everyday life and the language that people prefer most to use with them during their communication.

Table 5.12.: Armenian language use with different interlocutors in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian language Athens 83 31.31 8.01 use with different interlocutors 41.30 .000 Istanbul 68 23.23 7.26

Table 5.13.: Armenian language use of different interlocutors in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian language Athens 91 20.45 6.04 use of different interlocutors 54.38 .000 Istanbul 84 14.14 5.19

The striking feature is that despite the fact that home domain is known as the most supportive for first language maintenance the findings in Table 5.12.and 5.13. donot provide support to this widely accepted sociolinguistic evidence. For instance, Armenians in Istanbul talk to their parents mostly Turkish. In addition, they parents also interact with them mostly in Turkish. One of the reasons for this is mostly their good command of Turkish and their lack of competence in Armenian1.Finally, compared to the Armenian community in Istanbul, informants in Athens reported stronger preference for Armenian language use.

Table 5.14.: Armenian language choice for different activities in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian Athens 92 16.95 7.45 language use for different activities 9.20 .003 Istanbul 88 14.06 5.02

Table 5.15.: Armenian language preference for express feelings in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian language Athens 96 18.62 8.12 express feelings 7.08 .008 Istanbul 94 15.85 6.06

Armenian informants in Istanbul mainly use Turkish to express their feelings and do their daily activities. This result indicates that since Armenians in Istanbul were born, educated and socialize there and they consider the land as their fatherland, they are much more proficient in Turkish. It is clear cut that Armenians in Istanbul consider Turkish their dominant language and they use it to communicate with different interlocutors both in private and public domain. Accordingly, since an academic and professional environment requires Turkish language competence, several Armenians who are actively involved with the educational or professional institutions of the mainstream society use widely the Turkish language.

1The use of ‘good command’ or ‘good competence’ of a language in this research is not a statistically tested result of the survey since I had no separate questionnaire or scale measuring the language skills and abilities of the informants. It is mainly through my personal interaction and through my observations during the whole duration of my data analysis.

Table 5.16.: Armenian language importance in Athens and Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian language Athens 95 35.56 10.38 importance .397 .529 Istanbul 90 36.47 9.16

As is shown in Table 5.16.there is a non-significant difference among Armenians in Athens and in Istanbul. The informants of both generations showed almost equal choices on the statements. They consider both Armenian and mainstream language important enough for a smooth integration to the mainstream society.

Table 5.17.: Armenian or mainstream language preference in Athens and in Istanbul City context N. M. S.D. F p Armenian language Athens 96 18.76 3.99

20.87 .000 Istanbul 94 21.53 4.36

Finally, Armenian informants in Athens seem to be more neutral concerning their attitudes for Armenian language. They report that both languages are nice, pleasant, modern, distinguished and polite which consist the scale of Armenian language preference. In accordance with the previous tables of language use, choice and preference Armenians informants in Athens show a stronger preference to bilingualism than Armenian in Istanbul who are dominant to the Turkish language.

The quantitative results, despite detailed description of relations and patterns of choice and preference for language use, were not able to fully illustrate the richness of interviewees’ experiences. In the quantitative research the different linguistic patterns were classified and categorized. In this stage of qualitative research these linguistic patterns will be identified in order to provide a greater insight and understanding. Each method has something to contribute to corpus studies whereas the combination of them provides a breadth and extensive amount of information which is the benefit of this multi-method approach.

5.8.Demographic status Athens

Armenians have a long history of residence in Athens, Greece. The director of Armenian Ethnic Committee elaborates:

“Today almost 42.000 Armenians live in Greece. Approximately 5.500 of them live in the capital of Athens and the majority of them hold Greek nationality”

Armenians in Athens are concentrated mostly in two resident areas called Neos Kosmos, which is close to the city center of Athens, and in Kokinia which is in the western part of Athens. Additionally, two out of the three Armenian schools are located in those two areas as well. In order to gain some information regarding the status quo of the Armenian community in Greece, I interviewed the director of AzgayinVarchutyun (Ethnic Assembly). Ethnic Assembly is the head of Armenian organizations in Greece. Its role is to organize and coordinate the Armenian community and its organizations. According to him, Armenian community has positive relations with the Greek state.

“I have to admit that the relationship of Armenian community with the Greek state is perfect”

However, he explains that Armenian community is not officially recognized in Greece and it does not have any legal entity which is a drawback that the Armenian Ethnic Assembly tries to confront.

“There is no official document at stake. We are not a minority and we are not officially recognized in any way. That’s a big problem. For example, Armenian community cannot be represented in the court; there is not any official document, which means Armenian community does not have legal entity. This is a main problem that deeply concern our community and its activities within Greek state”

Istanbul

Armenians living in Istanbul have a special connection with the land. Almost 60,000- 70,000 Armenians who live there deny calling themselves diasporic. I interviewed a priest in Istanbul who was responsible for different cultural activities in the Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul.

“Me? Ha-ha. I am not diasporic. Who told you Anatolia is diaspora? If you want to call something diaspora, go to Europe, I do not care, but Anatolia? No!”

In addition, he explains the important role of Armenian Patriarch in Istanbul.

“We are the head of the Armenian community in Istanbul. We are both ethnic and spiritual, religious center of Armenians living here. We represent the

Armenian community and we also mediate between Armenian community and Turkish state”

Finally, he agrees that being an officially recognized community in Turkey creates several benefits.

“We are an officially recognized religious minority in Istanbul since 1923. That creates a series of benefits”

5.9.Education Athens

In Athens there are three Armenian schools. Those schools count almost 350 students in total. I interviewed two male and one female director of the Armenian schools in Athens. The director of the primary education of the school A explains:

“We have three Armenian schools in Athens. Two of them have only primary education and a kindergarten. And the third one has both primary and secondary education as well as a kindergarten. The total number of students is up to 350”.

In Armenian schools in Athens, education is given in the Armenian and Greek languages. Students also have the opportunity to learn English as a third language. However, during the years and especially in the secondary education the Armenian language and history courses are gradually decreasing especially because university entrance exams are all given in Greek.

“Armenian language, history and Christian religion courses are part of the school curriculum as well as Armenian geography but only for the secondary education students. But the hours of Armenian language and history are decreasing during the years since we give emphasis to the language of the mainstream society. This is mainly the case regarding the secondary education students”

Teachers of the Armenian language and history are selected and recruited by the Armenian school and were paid partly from the Greek state, nevertheless the last year because of the financial crisis in Greece, teachers of Armenian courses are paid from the Armenian community. Teachers of the Greek language and other courses taught in Greek are recruited, selected and paid by the Greek state. The director of the primary education of school B shares some concerns with us:

“We have a serious financial problem; it is very difficult for us. Month by month we try to secure the necessary for our survival money. And you know right? If there is no school in a community, that community is fated to die”

Continues:

“The Greek state provides us Greek teachers. But, we have the right to change and select others if we are not satisfied with them. Thanks God, this year our cooperation with them is very good, I would say. The Greek teachers are paid from the Greek state. The same happened with the majority of the Armenian ones since last year. From this year on because of the financial crisis in Greece the Greek state stopped funding Armenian teachers. Now, the Armenian community itself has to pay them. That makes our expenses even more unaffordable”

Armenian schools before the crisis in Greece were used to receive 75.000 euros annually for their expenses. This funding is cut up to 50% nowadays. Families contribute monthly with a small amount of money which is not enough maintaining a descent school. Additionally, other Armenian organizations support financially the Armenian schools, as well. For instance the philanthropic organization called ‘Gabouid Hach’ (Blue Cross). In the last section of this chapter this organization will be presented and analyzed separately. The director of the primary education of School A explains:

“We have a serious financial problem, families pay every month for their children but that is not enough for us to survive. The Greek state used to pay for the Armenian schools but because of the financial crisis in the country, this year decided to cut the funds up to 50%. That’s a huge problem for us. For that reason last week we organized a campaign in order to secure some money for the Armenian schools. Without funding we will face a serious problem of existence and surviving”

However, their concerns are not only regarding the financial situation but also regarding the lack of Armenian competence that students have in Armenian language. According to both directors, Armenian language is not popular among Armenian students:

“I hear Greek in the yard during the breaks; however it is absolutely forbidden to speak Greek during the Armenian classes”

“I hearGreek in the yard! Unfortunately, families do not support their kids speaking Armenian in the home domain. But we try; we sometimes make it as a game. The group of children speaking more Armenian gains points for their group. We are trying alternative methods, not shouting or yielding”

The director of school B insists that Armenian language has to become a part of younger generation’s everyday life in order to survive.

“Armenian language ‘has to live’, and I accept hearing my student use ‘bad words’ in Armenian because those ‘bad words’ are also part of the language. A language cannot stay alive only in the books and in the grammar notebooks,

has to be a tool in children’s everyday life, and yes! Making jogs, fighting with each other and saying ‘bad words’ are all part of a language that is still alive! Ha-ha”

The director of the secondary education in school C refers to the future of Armenian language. Additionally, he insists that Armenian language is an important component of Armenian culture and identity;

“We fight against language shift every single day”

Finally, he mentions mix marriages and the differences between students whom both parents are Armenian and students whom one of them might be Greek.

“There are students coming from mix marriages that they cannot even say ‘Good morning’. There are some students with a good command of Armenian and there are children with a really poor command of the language”

Istanbul

In Istanbul I interviewed three female directors of three Armenian Schools. The director of school C mentions regarding the schools:

“There are 14 primary and secondary schools in Istanbul, 5 high schools and one separate kindergarten. The overall number of the Armenian students within Armenian schools is almost 3,000. However, we evaluate that there are almost 3,000 more Armenian students attending mainstream Turkish schools, mostly privates”

She continues concerning the courses taught within the school curriculum:

“Officially, the courses are mainly taught in Armenian language except from Turkish history, geography, literature and language. In the primary school there is a course called ‘Sosyal bilgiler’ this is also in Turkish”

In Istanbul, the problems are more complex and multilayered than the problems in Athens. The number of students is gradually decreasing because of these problems. First of all, they confront the problem of training and recruiting Armenian teachers. In Turkey, there is no major for teaching the Armenian language in any department of any university. Teachers giving the Armenian courses are usually graduates of the Armenian schools and somehow fulfill the requirements of teaching. The director of school B explains:

“Unfortunately, in Turkish universities there is not a department of Armenian language and literature, there is a department for Greek, Russian, Spanish, Latin but Armenian? Armenian, no”

The director of school C elaborates:

“The Armenian teachers, in their majority, are graduates of our school, we know the level of their Armenian competence so we can choose the best ones if there is a lack of Armenian language teachers”

The second problem that Armenian schools in Istanbul experience concerns the administrative context and the role of the Turkish chief deputy head of schools (official naming). The role of the chief deputy is to help the directors in the management of the school. Turkish chef deputy has also the responsibility to supervise the Turkish language and culture teachers. During her/his absence only a Turkish courses’ teacher can replace the chief deputy. His role is contradictory within schools. Turkish state claims that chief deputies are there to help out directors in their daily tasks. However the directors have often a different opinion. The director of school A mentions:

“So, the system is as follows; in every Armenian school the director is Armenian but there is always an assistant director who is always Turkish and is sent from the Turkish state. Her/his official role is to help the Armenian director but the truth is different, the Turkish state sent this director in order to control what’s happening within schools, that’s the main concept, but that is more up to the person, there are some really nice people coming but also some really annoying ha-ha! And what can I tell? It is not a matter of nationality; it is a matter of personality”

Several families prefer sending their children in private Turkish schools where the facilities are excellent. In this respect, lots of students who do not speak Armenian in the home and education domain end up knowing anything about the Armenian language and culture. The director of school B expresses her experiences:

“Here (meaning in Turkey) 90 out of 100 families use only Turkish in their home domain. Imagine how difficult it is for these children speaking Armenian in school”

The director of school A tells about the private Turkish schools:

“Turkish private schools have those perfect facilities, swimming pools, tennis courts, the parents like them, they have the money so they prefer to send their kids in that schools than to those ancient, old buildings which we have to renew, ha-ha”

Finally, the director of school B answers my question regarding the mixed marriages as follows:

“But in the end is how you feel; there are so many examples where Turkish people try to protect Armenianness more than some Armenians themselves”

(referring to the Turkish partners of the Armenians whom children attend the Armenian schools)

5.10. Media Athens

Armenian daily newspaper called ‘Azad Or’ (meaning ‘Free Day’) is a reality in the Armenian community of Athens since 1923. The head-editor of the newspaper agreed to share some important information with me:

“Azad or has a huge history behind. In 1923 for the first time the first issue get published with a different name back then; Nor or (meaning New Day). It was in 1940 when the newspaper stopped its activities. It starts to publish again in 1945. From then until nowadays, exactly 70 years now, Azad or reaches 1.500Armenian homes in Athens every single day”

Media deeply influence the construction and the activities of the community. It is also an important component of the Armenian language and culture:

“Azad or is only in Armenian language .It is the link between Armenian organizations, it is also a window promoting Armenianness and Armenian news to the society…”

“It is very important when children will return from their school and during the lunch time will have the opportunity to have a look to an Armenian newspaper. Even if the child will only read the headlines”

In addition, she shares her concerns regarding the Armenian language competence of the younger generation.

“I noticed that younger generation has serious problems of Armenian language use. I know that not everybody will read the whole newspaper but having an Armenian newspaper in an Armenian home is always positive. And… I must say that you can also find our newspaper online”

Finally, she thinks that the work going on in daily basis is very important; when I asked her to conclude with something that she feels that want to say about her job as well as for the role of the newspaper in the Armenian community she answers:

“Maintaining a daily Armenian newspaper in a foreign country is a sign of an active community willing to survive”

Finally, alongside with ‘Azad Or’ there is a monthly magazine called ‘Armenica’ which means ‘Armenian’ in Greek. This magazine promotes news from the Armenian community in Athens as well as news from the rest diaspora. It is a very popular one especially for the younger generation. The magazine is published only in Greek and

this might be considered as the reason of its popularity among the younger generation circles.

Istanbul

In Istanbul there are three active Armenian newspapers; ‘Zamanag’ (meaning ‘Hour’), ‘Marmara’ and ‘Agos’ (meaning ‘Furrow’). ‘Agos’ is the most popular newspaper both for the Armenian community and for the Turkish society. It is a weekly, bilingual Armenian newspaper and it was first published in April of 1996.

“The first issue was published in 1996. It was Easter and we were excited”

‘Agos’ is mainly in Turkish language. Today, almost 24 pages get published every week; 20 of them in Turkish and four (sometimes more) pages in Armenian. I interviewed the chief editor of the Armenian part of ‘Agos’ who described us how the idea of a bilingual Armenian-Turkish newspaper was born back then:

“I am the main editor of the Armenian part of Agos. And if the next question is “since when»? Let me tell you, six months before the day that Agos was established ha-ha. But when we first published the newspaper almost 80% of the people living in Turkey were not able to write and read Armenian and especially people from Anatolia. We respected those people; we thought is important for them to be informed and updated concerning their community’s news. That was the concept of our bilingual newspaper. ”

‘Agos’ was and still is not only a newspaper for the Armenian community in Turkey but also the home of Armenianness2. In its first issues ‘Agos’ published Armenian culture columns in its attempt to introduce the Armenian norms and values to the Armenians in Istanbul and in Anatolia who were feeling Armenian but they did not have any command of Armenian language or any knowledge of Armenian culture. The issues that get published in Turkish language gained immediately the love and respect of the community and of the mainstream society.

“Those people (meaning Armenian from Anatolia) were Armenians and Christians but they did not have idea about the Armenian culture, we tried, especially the first years, to present in our newspaper poems form Armenian poets, introduce them Armenian artists; photographers and painters. We all agreed ‘We’re going to do everything in Turkish’. The benefit was double. Beside Armenians in Anatolia, Turkish people start reading our pages, to love our newspaper, being part of our family. Now the newspaper presents mainly daily, Turkish, social and political news. Lots of Turks approach me and ask me quite often I would say ‘Why don’t you include in your pages Armenian culture columns? Ha-ha”

2 The word ‘Armenianness’ is used by the author to express the feeling of being Armenian.

During my visit there I became a part of their welcome and warm environment. ‘Agos’ is the place where Armenian and Turkish chief editors, editors, columnists and journalists cooperate for the best outcome. In ‘Agos’ while we had our discussion with the Armenian part chief-editor of the newspaper, the name Hrant Ding was mentioned.

“Now, I am the only founder of the newspaper left, Hrant is dead…”

Hrant Ding was one of the founders of ‘Agos’ as well. He murdered in 19th of January 2007. Hrant Ding was an active citizen fighting for the Armenian –Turkish reconciliation and for human and minority rights against the Turkish state. ‘Agos’ always remembers him with utmost respect, honor and pride. The issue of not being diasporic for once more comes up during the interview with the chief editor of ‘Agos’ who give a different perspective and point of view;

“I will become a bit politic now, we (meaning the Turkish) had some nice governments who were in favor of Armenian people but we had some not nice let’s say, but we are fighting every day to stay here and to speak freely because we were demanding and we still demand that this country is our fatherland, it is the country where we born, is our home, we do not have any intension to give up and we do not have any intension to go away”

When I asked the chief editor to describe the profile of the newspaper he answers:

“It is widely known that we are socialist newspaper, we do not fondle the back of the government (meaning the newspaper is critical) and we will never do it”

Finally, in the conclusion of our fruitful discussion he mentions that he believes in good neighbor relations between Armenia and Turkey.

“We are in favor to open the boarders between Armenia and Turkey. We were always in favor of that and we still insist on our purpose. You will tell me: ‘Yes fine, but you didn’t see any result’ Yes, true we didn’t but we still try. There are lots of people who do not agree with that. They think there are no benefits from this. But I believe in good neighbor relations between the two nations. No brotherhood yet, because we did not yet clear up the 1915’s debt. They did not say ‘Pardon’ yet. That still remains”

5.11. Religious matters and Marriage patterns Athens

Armenians and Greeks have the same religion, which results to a better relationship between the two nations. In total, there are four Armenian Orthodox churches in Greece. Armenian churches from their very beginning targeted to a peaceful coexistence with the Greek society and the Greek Patriarch. Nowadays, Armenian

churches in Greece enjoy the respect of the Greek society. I interviewed the priest of one of the Armenian Churches named “Sourp Garabet” who elaborates concerning the double role of the Armenian Church in the Armenian community in Greece:

“The Armenian church in Greece from its genesis until nowadays is a religious and an ethnic institution. This is the double nature of the Armenian Church and is impossible to get separated. Personally, I am not only a priest; I am also an ethnic servant”

The liturgies in Armenian churches in Athens take place in Armenian language. Additionally, according to the priest in the rest diaspora liturgies take place in the language of the mainstream society. Furthermore, during the baptism in the Armenian churches the first name of the child has to be always Armenian. This an important factor since the name is inextricably linked with the notion of identity.

“Armenian churches do make their liturgies in Armenian language. In other European countries liturgies take place in English or French because of lack of native competence in Armenian. Fortunately, that is not the case in Greece”.

“During the baptism in the Armenian church, the first name of the child is obligatory to be an Armenian name”

Finally, when I asked his opinion regarding the marriage patterns he concluded:

“There is a big difference between the mix and non-mix marriages. In mix marriages a foreigner enters in the family, the danger of losing the Armenian language and identity gets bigger .It is infortune that our best quality young people get married with foreigners. And it is weird for me because exactly those people had been members of our Armenian institutions form the very beginning. It is a mystery we couldn’t solve yet but this issue is a taboo in the Armenian community”

It is noteworthy the use of word ‘foreigner’. The interviewee strongly believes that the Armenian families should remain ‘purely’ Armenians. According to him, the fear of losing the Armenian identity is present when people who do not belong to the same ethnic identity group enter the family. Alongside with fear, the sense of belongingness is under threat when people who are not supposed to belong in the same group attempt to step into a group’s boundaries.

Istanbul

In Istanbul there are 38 Armenian churches in total. In the same vein with Athens, churches are not only spiritual, religious centers but also ethnic centers of Armenianness as well. The priest that I interviewed from the Armenian Patriarch in Istanbul used the word ‘Azgabed’ in order to describe the role of Armenian Patriarch in Istanbul. ‘Azgabed’ is a compound word. The first syllable of the word is ‘Azg’

which means nation and the second syllable is ‘bed’ which means leader. In this respect, Armenian Patriarch is the leader, the representative and the mediator of the Armenian community in the Turkish society and the Turkish state as well. During our discussion some interesting information regarding the religious practices of the Armenians in Istanbul came out. Those practices according to the priest are greatly and deeply influenced by the Ottoman practices. In addition, he explained that there are several Ottoman practices embedded in the Armenian religious practices.

“It is impossible two nations, wherever they are, Istanbul or Turkey or anywhere else, to interact for hundreds of years and do not get influenced or do not adopt cultural practices from each other. It is just not possible!”

Finally, he gave some interesting information concerning the architecture of the Armenian Patriarch as a building.

“For example, have a look to the construction of this building. Its architecture is Armenian and it is an official Armenian building but it had been constructed based in the Ottoman Empire architecture system. It has a small room before the main entrance. You do not feel whether you’re outside or inside. It is the appropriate place to take off your jacket, put your umbrella. This is a cultural trade and you cannot claim, this is ours, there is not such a thing, there is an ongoing interaction thousands of years now”.

5.12. Cultural organizations and activities Athens

‘Gabouid Hach’ which means Blue Cross is an Armenian philanthropic organization with female members only. It is one of the most important organizations for the Armenian community in Athens since it is the main financial source for Armenian schools, newspaper and other Armenian institutions and organizations. It counts several offices around Athens. The head of organization coordinates and controls the activities of the separate offices. I interviewed the director of one of the offices who describes the role of the organization.

“Gabouid Hach is a philanthropic organization, with female members only, helping Armenian Community in Athens 90 years now. We have 5 departments within Athens and we aim helping both financially and psychologically the members of the community who are in need and promote the Armenian spirit as well. Gabouid Hach is an active organization which counts several departments all over the world in all Armenian communities with different names in each country”

The director explains that there are different cultural activities and festivities going on the whole year. Their main purpose is to gather money for the Armenian community

and to promote Armenian culture and tradition to the mainstream society. For instance,

“Gabouid Hach annually organizes a big bazaar where someone can find traditional Armenian food. Greek people always are interested in our cuisine, they wait, they ask and they want to buy our food, it is a way to promote Armenian culture and to secure some money for our community”

When I asked her regarding the ‘female-only recruiting project’ she answers:

“But we have to recruit young people. Not all young ladies are willing to participate in our organization. And for how long our old members will last? Not that much I guess ha-ha. I personally believe that we also have to recruit male members and not only females because philanthropy it doesn’t only concern females but males as well but now so it is …”

‘Gabouid Hach’ is a very active organization which holds different projects and initiatives. Its main concern is the Armenian schools and their financial problems.

“We know that Armenian schools in Athens need us. Lots of money goes there”

In addition, ‘Gabouid Hach’ attempts to protect and promote Armenian language through different and various ways. However, during my observations I realized that there is a lack of Armenian language competence among the Armenian members of the community in Athens. According to the director’s experiences people do not have a good command of the Armenian language which results their withdrawal from the Armenian culture, norms and values. In the same vein with the Armenian newspaper people have hard time to read Armenian literature. The director elaborates,

“We ordered 20 fairy tale books in Armenian language from Lebanon in order to sell them in one of our cultural activities that we organized; 100 people were there … 100!!! And can you imagine that we were able to sell only six of them? I mean it is not a heavy book, it is just a fairy tale, I don’t know, I think people drew away from Armenian culture and language”

Istanbul

In Istanbul I visited the publishing house called ‘Aras’. ‘Aras’ started its activities in 1993. Its main role is to publish books regarding Armenian culture in both Turkish and Armenian language. However, the majority of them are in Turkish since, according to one of the editors, Armenians in Istanbul are more fluent in Turkish than in Armenian.

“Aras is 21 years old. Its main role is to publish both Armenian and Turkish books, all related to Armenian history and culture. So far Aras published 142 books. 90 of them are in Turkish language and the rest are in Armenian.

That’s because the majority of Armenians here have a poor command of Armenian. However, they have a very good Turkish competence. Finally, we also make translations of books from Armenian or other languages to the Turkish language”

The big number of published books in Turkish language confirms the higher Turkish language use patterns towards Armenian in Istanbul. The majority of them are in Turkish; an indicator that Turkish language is more popular than Armenian and widely used from Armenians living in Istanbul. ‘Aras’ and its activities are fundamental for the Armenian community in Istanbul. ‘Aras’ not only publish books but also imports Armenian, cultural books from abroad to Turkey and make them available to the Armenian community in Istanbul. Finally, ‘Aras’ collaborates with translators who do not work within the company but they are external cooperators. Their main task is to translate books from Armenian or other (especially English or French) languages to Turkish. This counts a double benefit; not only Turkish society but also Armenian community itself has the chance to find and read those books.

“Without Aras, Armenians in Istanbul would have harsh time trying to find those books abroad and even if they would have found it, the books would be in Armenian, difficult for them to read and understand. As a result, the translations of those books made by us is not only about introducing Armenian culture to the Turkish society but to the Armenian community in Istanbul as well”

However, the language problem is once more present; the Armenians in Istanbul have a poor command of Armenian and on the other hand a strong command of Turkish. That also creates a big issue concerning the Armenian-Turkish translations. The editor explains:

“We have a lack of professional Armenian translators with an excellent command of Armenian language. That makes the life of an editor a nightmare, ha-ha”

“If you ask the younger generation in Istanbul: ‘which is your mother tongue’? They will answer you: ‘The Turkish’. That’s the reality”

Finally, I interviewed a columnist from ‘Agos’ newspaper in Istanbul who also organizes and participates in workshops and conferences all over the world spreading Armenianness to the diaspora

“I write in Agos for many years now, I have my own column in the newspaper. I mostly write about Armenian language and culture. The most important for me is to write about Armenians in Anatolia. I was born in Caesarea. It is emotional for me. I also organize some workshops and I give lectures in Istanbul regarding Armenian culture. In addition, I travel a lot in order to

participate in international conferences. I lately was in the United States. The next days I will be in Germany. I try to spread the Armenian culture everywhere, ha-ha”

In addition, he gives lectures to the Turkish universities usually as a guest lecturer. He annually, accepts ten to fifteen invitations from various mainstream universities of the Turkish society. According to him, younger generation Turks differs in their world view compared to the older generation

“The last 7-8 years I give lectures as a guest in the Turkish universities about Armenian language and culture. Every year I accept at least 10-15 invitations. Young Turks are different, are more open-minded. That’s how youngsters have to be!”

5.13. Discussion Previously in this chapter the different themes were captured, coded and categorized in order to be closely analyzed and discussed. In this respect, ‘a shift took place from the original data itself to the data as a reconceptualized through the results of the labors’ (Dey, 1993). This reconceptualization that resulted after categorization will allow us to compare the phenomena between the two different cultural contexts of Athens and Istanbul. Categorizing is the process of drawing distinctions within the data and it is also a tool of comparison in terms of relations of similarity and difference (Dey, 1993). Durkheim in 1895 wrote in his famous ‘Rules of Sociological Method’ that the comparative method was not a branch of sociological methods but was sociology itself. In this respect, further in this chapter the different phenomena will be analyzed and compared between Athens and Istanbul. First of all, there is a difference between the two communities concerning the status quo. In Athens, Armenian community has no legal entity in contrast with Istanbul where the Armenian community is recognized as an officially religious minority with a series of rights and privileges. However, Armenian Ethnic Assembly in Greece is actively working in a document in collaboration with the Greek State regarding Armenian community’s official, legal recognition. Additionally, Armenians living in Athens have a migration background in contrast with Armenians in Istanbul who do not consider themselves diasporic but natives. During the interviews in Istanbul, the “diaspora” issue was almost a taboo. After the experience that I had with the first interviewee in Istanbul concerning this issue, I realized that I had to approach this issue with utmost respect and sensitivity. In this respect, people openly share with me their thoughts and experiences and extensively explain me why they do not consider themselves a diaspora. In addition, in education field there are several similarities between Armenian schools in Athens and in Istanbul. The financial problem, the difficulties of recruiting teachers and the number of students that annually get decreased are some of them. Nevertheless, those problems are more serious and thoughtful in Istanbul than in Athens and especially the issue of Armenian teachers’ recruitment. In Istanbul, Turkish state should seriously consider establishing a faculty of Armenian language

and literature in order to train teachers in Armenian language to have a descent and suitable pedagogical level enables them, becoming teachers in the schools where Armenian teachers are needed. In the same vein, there is a lack of a faculty or a department of Armenian language and literature in Greece. In this respect, the previous recommendation would be applicable for the case of Greece as well. The financial problem is the most important problem both in Athens and in Istanbul. In case of Athens, teachers, school directors and different responsible principles for the schools within the community are deeply concerned regarding the funding of the Armenian schools in Athens. The financial crisis in Greece which started in 2008 counts several victims. One of them is the Armenian schools that from 2008 until nowadays several times were close to bring their existence into an end. The different campaigns that were organized were able to secure some money for the schools. Furthermore, the situation becomes even more urgent when this year Greek state decided to cut the funding of Armenian schools up to 50% and also stop paying partly the teachers as it used to do before. In this respect, schools now are responsible to pay the salaries of the Armenian teachers. It is noteworthy that in Istanbul Armenian community itself had and still has the responsibility to pay its teachers within Armenian schools. However, there is a major difference between Armenian schools in Istanbul and in Athens. In all Armenian schools in Istanbul the existence of chief deputy often creates problems to the smooth operation of the schools. The head of directors as well as the teachers have feelings of insecurity and uncertainty since they think that their daily activities are under continuous control by the chief deputy. The role of chief deputy was and still is a controversial issue and a matter of instant argumentation between the Armenian schools and Turkish state. The fact that Turkish deputy has to approve and sign for all outgoing correspondences creates an inefficient dualism within schools. Because of this inefficient dualism, the removal of the chief deputy from the Armenian schools should be taken into consideration by the Turkish state and Minister of Education (MoNE). One of the main focuses of this research is the notion of identity. Religion and language are two core concepts inextricably linked with this notion. In Istanbul, religious practices are an important component of community’s religious and spiritual life. During my observations as well as during my discussions with the different interviewees in Istanbul, it becomes clear that religion, historical consciousness and language maintenance as well are Armenian core values contribute positively to the maintenance of Armenian identity. Verkuyten (2005) claims that religion is an important factor in peoples’ life and that religious identity is inextricably linked with ethnic identity. Armenian churches in Istanbul where several activities and festivities take place during the year are key centers of social activities and other facilities. In addition, every Armenian school in Istanbul shares a site with a church. In the middle of the back yard where the children spend their times during the breaks, an Armenian church is always present. In the same vein, Armenian churches in Athens where several celebrations and social activities take place play a major role in the community’s life. Additionally, Armenian churches are places where Armenian

identity is protected through the mysteries of wedding and baptism. Armenian traditions and core values are always present in the Armenian churches when a couple decides to get married or baptizes a child according to the Armenian traditions. In line with religion, language choice, use and preference is the second important component for the concept of identity. The main similarity between the two Armenian communities in Athens and in Istanbul concerning language is their constant passion and fight to protect and promote Armenian language as well as to make it a dominant language. In conjunction with the previous, the second similarity is the language shift that gradually takes place both in Athens and in Istanbul. Especially in Istanbul, Turkish is more widely a language of use, choice and preference than Armenian. In Greece, interviewees during our discussions informed me that nevertheless Armenian community attempts to promote Armenian language there is a withdrawal of Armenians from their culture and language. For instance, younger generation does not have the language confidence to read an Armenian newspaper or an Armenian book, Armenian members in total during the various social and cultural activities confront hard time expressing themselves in Armenian and finally Greek language replaces the Armenian not only in the public domain but also in the home domain, especially in the case of mix marriages. Media representation is an important factor that deeply influences the position and the status quo of one community’s in the mainstream society. In Athens there is only one Armenian newspaper whereas in Istanbul there are three of them with ‘Agos’ be at the helm. During my observations I realized that the influence of ‘Agos’ in the Turkish society is strong. ‘Agos’ is a heavy duty newspaper playing several roles in the Armenian community in Istanbul. It is a center of Armenian language and identity, a radical newspaper against Turkish governments and a bilingual newspaper in which Armenian and Turkish editors, journalists and columnists are hosted for the best outcome through critical and accurate way of thinking. However, in Athens ‘Azad Or’ is treated with utmost love and respect since it the only one daily, Armenian newspaper in the diaspora in Europe. Nevertheless, during my observations I notice that Armenian communities both in Athens and in Istanbul do not rest but always work with passion and devotion in order to demand more from the Greek and Turkish states respectively. During the interviews both in Athens and in Istanbul some interviewees indicated their support to assimilative approaches and some of them indicated their opposition to them. In addition, the same interviewees were in favor of diversity and assimilation approaches in some cases whereas against them in different cases. For instance, interviewees in Athens claimed that it is absolutely normal and ‘acceptable’ to talk the language of the mainstream society in the public domain such as at work but on the other hand it is not ‘acceptable’ during the lunch time at the home domain. In the same vain, interviewees in Istanbul were in favor of assimilation approaches in the school domain whereas they were against them within the church for example. For instance, the directors of the Armenian schools in Istanbul informed me that parents insist on Turkish language courses than the Armenian ones since they are deeply concerned about the entry examination of their children to the Turkish universities. It

is noteworthy that even in Armenian schools which is the second most important domain after home for the protection of the Armenian language there is an instant and unconscious promotion of the language of the mainstream society. Finally, the sense of being and remaining Armenian was the strongest similarity for all interviewees both in Athens and in Istanbul. Despite the fact that several of them used “we” while they were referring to Turks or Greek they always carried the feeling of being an Armenian and fighting to remain as one beside the difficulties and the daily struggles. Both communities are aware of this difficult task which becomes even more demanding and challenging during the years. This feeling and this responsibility is their inspiration and motivation as well as their weapon to keep their language, culture and identity alive to transmit it to the younger generation.

CHAPTER 6

Conclusions and Discussion

In the previous chapter the results of the quantitative and qualitative analysis were presented, analyzed and discussed. This final chapter attempts to link the outcomes of this research to other explanatory models and theories. But first, the findings of the study will be summarized and some final remarks will be made. Before stepping further to the conclusions and discussion part, it is noteworthy to explain the definition of aforementioned and abovementioned use of ‘Armenian culture’. Armenians, Turks or Greek are not homogeneous entities. There are numerous differences not only between them but also towards them. However, is important to reflect to the interviewees experiences. In this respect, the Armenian culture is used here as a fixed concept with a symbolic use. The concept of ‘Armenian culture’ illustrates social customs, rules, norms, values and patterns of cultural behavior. In addition, it demonstrates the symbols such as flag or history. Finally, embedded in the concept of ‘Armenian culture’ one might include the components of everyday life such as music, traditions, food, news and cultural activities.

6.1. Identity

Identity is a complex and multilayer notion. Talking about minority groups or majority groups requires an awareness of this complexity. Identity as Erikson (1950) reflected is a synthesis of personal, cultural and social dimensions. Cultural identity is defined in terms of group belongingness (Jensen, 2003).Findings derived from the survey present Armenians having a high self-esteem with regard to their cultural identity. Armenians both in Istanbul and in Athens in their interviews reported that they value high Armenian cultural norms and values. Korostelina (2007) defines social identity in terms of group similarities and out- group differences. Armenian informants both in Athens and in Istanbul attach a great deal of significance to their in-group membership. Findings derived from the results of quantitative research show that Armenian ethnic identification scale got very high mean values especially towards Armenian informants in Istanbul. In addition, Armenians informants in Athens and in Istanbul reported dissimilar views concerning their attachment with the mainstream identity. Armenians in Athens showed quite high level of identification with Greek cultural practices in contrast with Armenians living in Istanbul who did not attach a great deal of significance to their out-group membership. In this respect, ones might say that Korostelina’s (2007) theory is proven in the case of Armenians living in Istanbul but not in the case of Armenians in Athens where results showed a high level of attachment with their out- group membership. Schwartz, Zamboanga &Weisskirch (2008) define personal identity as the preferences of an individual in the area of politics, religion or family and friendships which are all part of individual’s personality. Armenians living in both cultural

contexts indicated that being Armenian is an aspect of their personality. Finally, Bağci (2012) mentions that ethnic identity has to do with the meaning of ‘emotional allegiance to a particular group’. People usually feel insecure when their ethnic identity is under threat. Results derived from the survey presented Armenians in Athens and in Istanbul showing high affiliation with their Armenian ethnic identity as well as a strong cultural Armenian identification. During the interviews, they express their willingness to maintain their Armenian cultural practices. Finally, they also reported that losing their ethnic identity would be a threat to their community’s in- group cohesion. Extra &Yagmur (2004) claim that not only the ethnic identity of the minority group is important but also the ethnic identity of the majority group and the national identity as well. However, neither minority groups nor mainstream groups should be considered as homogeneous entities. Several informants and interviewees both in Athens in Istanbul self-identified as Armenians, although in different domains of social life individuals also self-identified as Greek or Turks. Armenians living in both cultural contexts experience a rich social and cultural diversity. Due to this diversity Armenian communities are in a constant interaction with the mainstream societies. Findings derived from interviews and questionnaires presented that this interaction results to cultural trade between Armenians and Greek or Turks respectively. A higher identification with the mainstream society was found between Armenians living in Athens than Armenians living in Istanbul.

6.2. Social Networking

Studying social network in relation to language use can provide all the necessary insights into the language use and preference patterns of informants and interviewees. Social network can be defined as a community’s member access to the mainstream society and its various institutions and organizations. In case of Athens Greek seems to be the dominant language in Armenian schools and according to one of the directors when a student does not speak Greek she /he feels excluded from the rest group. In this respect, social network and language use and choice are two concepts inextricably linked with each other. Clyne (1991, 2004) claims that the greater the distance between the culture of a community and the culture of the mainstream society the greater the language maintenance on the part of the minority group. In line with this theory, the external factors that influence the interactive acculturation orientations of both Armenian communities and of mainstream societies might be related. If the minority group is received warmly by the host group and if the cultural differences between those groups are small and can be bridged, then the intergroup boundary is low and this results to a greater language shift. On the other hand, if intergroup boundaries are strong and distinct enough and cultural differences are too great to be bridged, then the language maintenance is more likely to be achieved. Nevertheless, is important the policies of the mainstream societies. Bağci (2012) agrees that the attitudes and the policies of the mainstream society towards the

immigrants have a huge impact on the acculturation orientations of the immigrants. Informants both in Athens and in Istanbul are convinced that mainstream societies should protect and promote by any means Armenian culture and language. In addition, interviewees reported that the host societies should value diversity and contribute to the maintenance of Armenian cultural values and norms. However, this opposed the theory of Extra &Yagmur (2004) who support the idea that mainstream institutions should encourage language shift and not provide support for language maintenance. On the other hand, ethnic minority groups’ themselves have the responsibility to protect their culture and language by setting up their own institutions to transmit their culture, norms and values to the next generation. Findings derived from questionnaires and from interviews presented that both communities need the support and encouragement of the mainstream society for Armenian’s language and culture protection and promotion.

6.3. Religious matters and marriage patterns

Religion was a significant source of social identity for some Armenians informants and interviewees both in Athens in Istanbul. On the other hand, for some was just a symbolic identification. It is noteworthy, that Armenians and Turkish have large cultural, historical and religious differences. In this respect, the meaning of religious identity carries a heavier weight for Armenians in Istanbul than for Armenians in Athens because the latter share the same religion with the mainstream society. However, Armenian interviewees in both cultural contexts mention than churches are not only religious, ritual or spiritual centers but also cultural centers where they can speak their language and practice Armenian cultural norms and values. In his respect, Armenian churches in Athens and in Istanbul they do not serve clearly as religious centers but also as cultural ones where the Armenianness can bloom and encouraged. Kipp et al. (1996) discuss the factors affecting the language maintenance and shift; birthplace, age, gender, education/qualifications, reason for migration, period of residence, marriage patterns are the most important variables mentioned. All these factors indicate different perspectives for approaching language maintenance and shift issues. Especially, marriage patterns turn out to be an important factor of this research. The type of marriage, whether with partners of the same ethnicity or partners with different cultural background, might affect children’s language use patterns. The findings from the interviews prove that the type of marriage, whether with a partner belongs to the same ethnic group whether in a different one indeed affects children’s language use, choice and preference. The directors of Armenian schools both in Athens and in Istanbul reported that they see huge difference between mix married and non-mix married children. The director of an Armenian school in Greece reported that there are children from mix marriages that they do not know even the basics when they first attend Armenian schools. Kipp et al. (1996) claim that females are more likely to maintain L1 than males, because males are more likely to marry females outside their own ethnic group. This theory is not proven to be the case neither for Armenians in Istanbul nor

for Armenians in Athens. In Istanbul, the director of one of the Armenian schools elaborates based on her experiences that gender does not play a role. She claimed that the most important factor is whether the partner who is not Armenian will respect and encourage the child to attend an Armenian school or not. The same argument was also supported from the directors in the Armenian schools in Athens based on their daily experiences with the students and the parents. However, the director of the second Armenian school in Istanbul that I interviewed had a different perspective. She claimed that males mostly decide which school is more appropriate for their child. In this respect, when the male partner is Armenian the child is more likely to attend an Armenian school. However, the biggest competitor of Armenian schools in the case of Istanbul is the Turkish private, excellent equipped schools. Parents, if it is financially affordable for them, no matter their gender or ethnicity prefer to send their children to these mainstream, private schools and not to the Armenian ones.

6.4. Ethnolinguistic Vitality

Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor (1977) introduced the theoretical framework of ethnolinguistic vitality where the analysis of language maintenance and shift is possible. In this framework status, demographic, institutional support and control are combined to greatly influence the vitality of ethnolinguistic groups. Both communities in Athens and in Istanbul self-identified as Armenians. However, Armenians in Istanbul are officially recognized as a religious minority whereas Armenian community in Athens has no legal entity. This is an important finding concerning the status quo of both communities. Institutional support is also an important dimension. The head editor of the Armenian newspaper ‘Agos’ in Istanbul and the head editor of the Armenian daily newspaper ‘Azad or’ in Athens as well as different members of the Armenian organizations and institutions in Athens and in Istanbul ensure that Armenian media and cultural organizations do their best in order to protect, promote and encourage the Armenian language use and choice towards Armenians in both cultural contexts. This institutional support and encouragement results to high ethnolinguistic vitality. According to the literature, ethnolinguistic vitality might be low, medium or high based on language’s strengths and weaknesses in the different domains. The findings from the quantitative research support this argument since Armenians in Istanbul interact with their interlocutors such as mother, father and siblings in home domain mainly in Turkish. Additionally, not only in the home domain but also in the public domain such as at work, education or even with friends Armenians in Istanbul speak and interact in Turkish. In this respect, Turkish language overshadows Armenian language and Turkish language’s strengths in contrast with Armenian language’s weaknesses result to a low Armenian language vitality. However, language behavior does not stand alone and it is not the only factor that influences a community’s ethnolinguistic vitality. Yagmur (1997) evaluates that concerning ethnolinguistic vitality there is a two-way interaction between social identity and language behavior. In this respect, Armenians living in Istanbul might have low

language vitality but on the other hand they have quiet high vitality concerning their social identification as Armenians. In conclusion, the findings support the argumentation made by Yagmur (1997) that language and social identity are two core concepts closely related that greatly and deeply influence each other.

6.5. Language use-choice and preference pattern

This research was designed mainly to investigate the extent of Armenian language maintenance and shift in two respective communities of Athens and Istanbul. Bağci (2012) mentions that the changing process from language maintenance to language shift might occur rapidly or gradually, sometimes taking many generations. Additionally, Appel&Muysken (1987) claim that there is a differentiation in the language maintenance and shift process between first and second generation of immigrants. The first generation mainly born in the country of origin is bilingual but the minority language is clearly dominant while the second generation is bilingual as well and either of the two languages may be stronger or both. This theory is proven in the case of Armenian informants in Athens. First generation informants speak mainly Armenian, second generation informants use Armenian mostly in the domestic domain with mother, father and siblings, while they speak mostly Greek in public domains such as at work or in school and with Greek friends. It is clear that second generation Armenians in Athens consider Greek as their dominant language. However, since they usually use Armenian to interact with domestic interlocutors such as father or mother eventually become competent in both languages. As a result, second- generation Armenian informants are mostly bilingual. It is noteworthy that quantitative and qualitative results were contradictory regarding the aforementioned issue of Armenian language competence. The informants in Athens mentioned that they have adequate knowledge of Armenian language and they also scored quite high referred their native competence in Armenian language. However, during the interviews in Athens there was a fear from the side of the interviewees that younger generation gradually but increasingly shifts the language from Armenian to Greek. This controversial phenomenon might have two explanations. The first case might be that younger generation exaggerates their skills in Armenian language. The second case is that the interviewees have a fear that second generation loses its skills in Armenian language which will result to language shift. Labov (1972) mentions that sociolinguistics studies issues of language shift become interesting and relevant only when the shift happens in community-wide. In this respect, this is an interesting and relevant research in the field of sociolinguistics since it aims to investigate the attitudes, patterns and relations of language use, choice and preference as well as the factors and reasons of language shift in two community- wide cultural contexts of Athens and Istanbul. Language shift refers to the process of the gradual shift from the use of the mother tongue to the dominant language in several domains (Gal, 1979). Minority

people do often shift their language and adopt the language of the mainstream society as a vehicle of communication mainly because mainstream language offers them the opportunity to get a better job or a better education. This upward social or economic mobility argumentation was a strong one especially in the case of education both in Athens and in Istanbul where the head of school directors claimed that Turkish and Greek are important in the Armenian schools of Turkey and Greece respectively since all the entry exams for the all universities are given are in the mainstream language. Yagmur (1997) makes the distinction between ‘intragenerational’ and ‘intergenerational’. According the first concept individuals lose their language skills because of a break in the linguistic tradition whereas according to the second, generation implies as the language shift when the second language replaces individuals’ first language. In both cases of Istanbul and Athens the second language of the mainstream society (Greek or Turkish) replaces gradually individuals’ first language; Armenian. In this respect there are both cases of ‘intergenerational’ language shift. Bağci (2012) claim that there is an intergenerational variation concerning issues of language use, choice and preference.This intergenerational variation is resulted due to the interaction of the younger generation with the institutions and organizations of the mainstream society. For instance, understanding majority’s group mentality is important for young Armenians to have a smooth interaction with people of the mainstream society in education domain or at work.

Some final Remarks

Due to this master thesis I had the opportunity to travel and live in Istanbul for almost a month. During my stay in Istanbul I was able to interact with different people both Armenians and Turks. In this respect, this research gave me the opportunity to widen my horizons and gain a great insight from the experiences of people who live and act in the particular cultural context. Due to this research project I was able to compare the different mindsets of Armenians living in Athens which is considered to be a diaspora and Armenians living in Istanbul which consider the land as their fatherland. In addition, I was able to observe the interaction between Armenians and Turks. I was living in the multicultural neighborhood called Kurtulus where the majority of Armenians are gathered. Every morning in its main shopping street different people both Armenians and Turks were coming together and share their concerns, problems and everyday news. It was that mornings when I first deeply understand and comprehend how was the interaction towards those people without the influence of politics and ideologies. This study investigated the phenomenon of Language maintenance and shift. My own research project helped me in understanding this complicated phenomenon through my personal stories. I still remember my parents when I was a child repeating to my brother and myself: “Speak Armenian!” when we were speaking Greek at home. My parents likewise lots of Armenian families tried hard to maintain Armenian language and culture in the home domain. When, the idea of my master thesis was

born thank to my supervisor dr. Kutlay Yagmur I realized that the phrase “Speak Armenian!” would turn into a scientific master dissertation during my whole experience as a Master student in Tilburg University. Finally, I would like to believe that through this master I was able to engage my understandings concerning issues of language maintenance and shift with my new contribution concerning processes of language maintenance and shift of Armenian language. In conclusion, during the collection of quantitative and qualitative data a remarkable tendency of Turkophobia was observed in Athens. While Armenian diaspora tend to have a fear for Turks due to historical factors, Armenians living in Turkey and especially in Istanbul approach issues with a different point of view and a completely different perspective. When Turks for diasporic Armenians are opponents, for Armenians living in Istanbul are neighbors and fellow citizens. Armenians in Istanbul believe in good neighbor relations and in two-way cultural, economic and social interaction between the two nations. On the other hand, during my observations I realized that Armenians living in Athens approach the issue inversely. They blame Turks of losing their families, their land and their properties. This heavy weight of lose results to prejudices and stereotypes. Hrant Dink who as an activist and humanist that extensively and efficiently fought not only for the Armenian –Turkish reconciliation but also for human and minority rights against the Turkish state and for that reason lost his life in January of 2007 one said:

“We are two diseased nations, Armenians and Turks. Armenians live with a big trauma against Turks and Turks live in paranoia against Armenians. We are two clinically diseased cases. Who [What] will cure us? The decision of the French senate? The decision of the US senate? Who will give the prescription? Who will be our doctor? Armenians are the doctors [cure] for the Turks. Turks are the doctors [cure] for Armenians. Other than this, there is no doctor, no prescription... Dialog is the only prescription. Doctors are each other’s. There is no solution other than this…”

Limitations

Finally, a number of important limitations need to be considered; first, the lack of access. Although the study has successfully demonstrated the answers of the student informants attending the Armenian schools both in Athens and in Istanbul, it has certain limitations in terms of finding and accessing students who attend the mainstream and not the Armenian schools of the hosted societies. Both in Athens and in Istanbul due to time pressure I had no chance to find Armenian students attending Greek or Turkish schools respectively. More information on students not joining Armenian schools would help us to establish a greater degree of accuracy on this matter. Secondly, the sample was widely representative of people with higher education in Athens but would tend to miss people with higher education in Istanbul. In this respect, the current investigation was limited by people in Istanbul with a higher education degree. A factor of this weakness is the fact that the secondary

education students’ participation was higher in Istanbul than in Athens. Further research needs to examine more closely the links between high educated informants in Istanbul and the issues of ethnic identification, cultural identity, social networks and ethnolinguistic vitality. Finally, an important limitation lies in the fact of my lack of fluency in Turkish language. All the interviews took place in Armenian language. However, during the interviews in Athens the interviewees had the possibility to shift their language into Greek in order to express their thoughts and feelings in a more explicit and clear manner. On the other hand, interviewees in Istanbul who also struggled in some points during the interviews were not able to shift their language into Turkish due to my lack of knowledge of Turkish language. However, the impact of the aforementioned limitation is not a decisive one since all interviewees were able to clearly communicate their messages to me in the Armenian language.

References

Adams, G.R. & Marshall, S.K. (1996). A developmental social psychology of

identity: Understanding the person in-context. Journal of Adolescence, 19, pp.

429-442.

Arrends –Toth, J. (2003). Psychological acculturation of Turkish migrants in the

Netherlands. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation , Tilburg University.

Appel, R. &Muysken, P. (1987).Language contact and bilingualism. London, UK:

Edward Arnold.

Atkinson, P. (1992). Understanding Ethnographic Texts.Newbury Park, CA, Sage

Publications.

Bağci, Ö. (2012). Acculturation Orientations of Turkish Immigrants in Germany.Ph.

D. dissertation , Tilburg University.

Baker, C. (1992). Attitudes and Language, Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism, Clevedon,

UK: Multilingual Matters.

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaption.Applied Psychology: An

international Review, 46, p.p.5-68.

Bourhis, R.Y., Giles, H. & Rosenthal, D. (1981).Notes on construction of a

‘subjective vitality questionnaire’ for ethnolinguistic groups.Journal of

Multilingual and Multicultural Development 2, pp. 145-155.

Bourhis, R. Y., Moise, L. C., Perreault, S. &Senecal, S. (1997). Towards an

Interactive Acculturation Model: A Social Psychological

Approach. International Journal of Psychology, 32, 6, p.p. 369-386.

Brubaker, R. & Cooper, F. (2000).Beyond Identity.Theory and Society, 29, pp. 1-47.

Clyne, M. (1991).Community languages: The Australian experience. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Clyne, M. (2004).Dynamics of language shift. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis: A user-friendly guide for social scientists.

London: New York, NY.

Edwards, J. (1992). ‘Sociopolitical aspects of language maintenance and loss: towards

a typology of minority language situations’. In W. Fase, K. Jaspaert& S.

Kroon (Eds.), The Maintenance and Loss of Minority Languages. (Vol. 37-

54), Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Edwards, J. (1999). Refining our understanding of language attitudes, Journal of

language and Social Psychology, 18 (1), pp. 101-110.

Ely, M., Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Garner, D. and Steinmetz, A. (1991). Doing

qualitative research: Circles within Circles, London, UK: Falmer Press.

Erikson, E.H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton.

Extra, G. &Yağmur, K. (2004). Dealing with multilingualism in multicultural

Europe.Crossnational perspectives on immigrant minority languages at home

and at school.Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Extra, G. &Yağmur, K. (2004). Urban multilingualism in Europe: Immigrant

minority languages at home and school. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Fazio, R.H., & Olson, M.A. (2003). ‘Attitudes: Foundations, functions, and

consequences’. In M.A. Hogg & J. Cooper (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of

Social Psychology (pp. 139-160), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ferguson, C. A. (January 01, 1959). Diglossia, Word, vol. 15, pp. 232-251.

Fink, A. and Kosecoff, J. (1998).How to conduct surveys: A step by step guide,

London, UK: Sage.

Fishman, J.A. (1964). Language maintenance and language shift as a field of inquiry,

Linguistics 9, pp. 32-70.

Fishman, J.A. (1972). The Sociology of Language, Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Fishman, J.A. (1980). Bilingualism and biculturalism as individual and as societal

phenomena, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1, 3–15.

Fishman, J.A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical

foundations of assistance to threatened languages, Clevedon, UK:

Multilingual Matters.

Fishman, J.A. (2001). Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language

Shift revisited: A 21st century Perspective, Clevedon, UK: Multilingual

Matters.

Fishman, J.A. and Garc a O. (2010). Handbook of language & ethnic identity. New

York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Fishman, J.A. (2010). ‘Sociolinguistics: Language and ethnic identity in context’. In

J.A. Fishman & O. Garcia (Eds), Handbook of Language and Ethnic identity

(2 ed., pp. 23-35), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Flick, U. (2007). Managing quality in qualitative research.(The Sage qualitative

research kit.) Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Gal, S. (1979). Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic change in Bilingual

Austria, New York, NY: Academic Press.

Gergen, K.J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life.

New York, NY: Basic Books.

Giles, H., R.Y. Bourhis, and D.M. Taylor. (1977). ‘Towards a theory of language in

ethnic group relations’. In Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations, ed.

H. Giles, 30748. London, UK: Academic Press.

Haugen, E.I. (1972). The Ecology of Language: Language science and national

development: Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

Hofmann, T. (2002).Armenians in Turkey today: A critical assessment of the situation

of the Armenian minority in the Turkish Republic, Bruxelles, Belgium: The

EU Office of Armenian Associations of Europe.

Hornberger, N. H. (2002). Multilingual Language Policies and the continua of

biliteracy: An ecological approach, Kluwer Academic Publishers,1, 27-51.

Husband, C. &Saifullah Khan, V. (1982). The viability of ethnolinguistic vitality:

Some creative doubts. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,

3, p.p. 193-250.

Hyltenstam, K. & Stroud, C. (1996).Language maintenance.In Goebl et al. (eds.),

Contact Linguistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Jaspaert, K. & Kroon, S. (1989). Social determinants of language loss.I.T.L. Review of

Aplied Linguistics, 83, 84, p.p. 75-98.

Jensen, L.A. (2003). Coming of age in a multicultural world: Globalization and

adolescent cultural identity formation.Applied development Science, 7, 3, p.p.

189-196.

Kaya, N. (2013). ‘Minority Schools and Fundamental problems in the Republic

Period’ In Kaya, N. and Somel, S. A. (2013) Minority Schools in Turkey from

Past to Present: Problems Experienced and Proposed Solutions, Istanbul,

Turkey: Global Dialogue.

Ketchen, D. J., & Bergh, D. D. (2004). Research methodology in strategy and

management: vol.1, Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Kipp, S., Clyne, M. and Pauwels, A. (1996).Immigration and Australia’s Language

Resources, Canberra: AGPS.

Kloss, H. (1968). Notes concerning a language-nation typology “Language problems

of developing nations” (Eds.) By Fishman J., Ferguson C. and Das Gupta,

New York: Wiley.

Korostelina, V.K. (2007). Social Identity and conflict.Palgrave Macmillan: England,

UK.

Kroon, S., &Vallen, T. (2006).‘Immigrant Language Education’. In K. Brown,

Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, Second Edition, volume 5, pp. 554-

557. Oxford: Elsevier.

Labov, W. (1972).Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English

Vernacular, Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Llamas, C., & Watt, D. J. L. (2010). Language and identities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press.

Mesthrie, R. (1999). Fifty ways to say ‘I do’: Tracing the origins of unstressed do in

Carpe Flats English, South African journey of linguistics, 17(1), pp. 58-71.

Not dead yet. (2006, November).The Economist. Retrieved from

http://www.economist.com/node/8173275

Richards, J. C., Platt, J. & Platt, H. (1985). Longman dictionary of applied linguistics.

London, UK: Longman.

Schwartz, S.J, Montgomery, M.J. & Briones, E. (2006). The role of identity in

acculturation among immigrant people: Theoretical propositions, empirical

research questions, and applied recommendations. Human developments, 49,

pp. 1-30.

Schwartz, S.J., Zamboanga, B.L. &Weisskirch, R.S. (2008).Broadening the study of

the self: Integrating the study of personal identity and cultural identity. Social

and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, p.p. 635-651.

Tesch.R. (1987). Emerging themes: The researcher’s experience. Phenomenology and

Pedagogy, 5, 3, p.p. 230-241.

Treaty of Lausanne. (2014). In Encyclopedia Britannica Retrieved from:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/332502/Treaty-of-Lausanne

Verkuyten, M. & Thijs, J. (2002).Multiculturalism among minority and majority

adolescents in the Netherlands.International Journal of Intercultural

Relations, 26, p.p.91-108.

Verkuyten, M. (2005).The social psychology of ethnic identity.Psychology Press.

Verkuyten, M. (2005). Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among

minority and majority groups: Testing the multiculturalism hypothesis.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, p.p. 121-138.

Wei, L. (1994). Three Generations, Two languages, One family: Language Choice

and a Language Shift in a Chinese Community in Britain, UK: Multilingual

Matters.

Wiley, T. G. and Wright, W. (2004). Against the undertow: Language-minority

education policy and politics in the ‘age of accountability’. Educational

Policy, 18(1), pp. 142-168.

Yagmur, K. (1997). First Language attrition among Turkish speakers in

Sydney.Studies in Multilingualism, 7, Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.

Yagmur, K. (2001). Turkish and other languages in Turkey. In G. Extra & D. Gorter

(Eds.), The Other Languages of Europe (pp. 407-427). Clevedon: Multilingual

Matters.

Yagmur, K. (May 01, 2009). Language use and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish

compared with the Dutch in the Netherlands. Journal of Multilingual and

Multicultural Development, 30, 3, 219-233.

Yagmur, K. (March 01, 2011). Does Ethnolinguistic Vitality Theory account for the

actual vitality of ethnic groups? A critical evaluation. Journal of Multilingual

and Multicultural Development, 32, 2, 111-120.

Yagmur, K. & Van de Vijver, F. (2011), Acculturation orientations of Turkish

immigrants in Australia, France and the Netherlands: An explanatory

investigation. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, pp. 1-21.

APPENDIX

SURVEY OF LANGUAGE, CULTURE & IDENTITY

If someone lives in a different culture, it is possible that there is interaction between this person’s home culture and the culture in which s/he lives. For instance, an Armenian person living in Turkey might add to Turkish culture and at the same time might be influenced by Turkish culture.

Some questions might sound rather uncommon to you, yet, this is an academic study. We would be very happy if you could answer all the questions to the best of your knowledge. In the given measurement scale please circle the relevant number which is closest to your opinion. Two sample questions are provided below:

For example, if you think that Turkey is a beautiful country, you can circle number 5

(definitely agree)

I definitely I definitely I don’t agree Neutral I agree don’t agree agree

Turkey is a beautiful country. 1 2 3 4 5

If you think that Turkey is NOT a beautiful country, you can circle 1 (definitely don’t agree).

I definitely I definitely I don’t agree Neutral I agree don’t agree agree

Turkey is a beautiful country. 1 2 3 4 5

All the information you provided will be confidential and used only for research purposes. Filling in the questionnaire takes around 20 minutes. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

For your questions E-mail: [email protected] Tel:

PART 1: PERSONAL INFORMATION

1) Gender:  Female  Male 2) Age: ……….. (in years) 3) Country of Birth  Armenia  Turkey  Other, namely: …………………………………… 4) How long have you been living in Turkey? ……… years. 5) In which country is your father born?  Armenia  Turkey  Other, namely: …………………………………… 6) In which country is your mother born?  Armenia  Turkey  Other, namely: …………………………………… 7) In which city do you live? …………………………………… 8) What is the last school diploma you got? …………………………………… 9) What is your job? …………………………………… 10) Are you married?  Yes  No 11) If you are married, in which country is your partner born?  Armenia  Turkey  Other, namely: ……………………………………

PART 2: TURKISH AND ARMENIAN CULTURE

1) Different people live in Turkey. To which group do you think you belong to?  The Armenian group  The Turkish group  Both Armenian and Turkish  Other, namely: ………………………………………………………………………………………………

I definitely I don’t agree Neutral I agree I definetly don’t agree agree

2) I feel Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

3) I feel Turkish 1 2 3 4 5

4) I feel Armenian because, I definitely I don’t agree Neutral I agree I definetly don’t agree agree

I speak Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

I am a Christian 1 2 3 4 5

I know much about Christian religion 1 2 3 4 5

I live in accordance with Armenian norms and values. 1 2 3 4 5

I was born from Armenian parents 1 2 3 4 5

I was raised as an Armenian person 1 2 3 4 5

I look Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

I feel much more comfortable next to Armenian people 1 2 3 4 5

Other people see me as an Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish culture does not appeal to me 1 2 3 4 5

5) I feel Turkish because,

I definitely I don’t agree Neutral I agree I definetly don’t agree agree

I speak Turkish 1 2 3 4 5

I know Turkish mentality very well 1 2 3 4 5

I live in accordance with Turkish norms and traditions 1 2 3 4 5

I was raised as a Turkish person 1 2 3 4 5

I look Turkish 1 2 3 4 5

I feel much more comfortable next to Turkish people 1 2 3 4 5

Other people see me as an Turkish 1 2 3 4 5

The Armenian culture does not appeal to me 1 2 3 4 5

6) Circle the relevant number for the following statements. I definitely I definetly I don’t agree Neutral I agree don’t agree agree

I am happy that I am Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

I feel some bond between myself and other Armenians. 1 2 3 4 5

Being Armenian does not say what kind of a person I am. 1 2 3 4 5

I regret that I am an Armenian. 1 2 3 4 5

When people talk about Armenians, I feel as if they

talk about me. 1 2 3 4 5

Being an Armenian is an important dimension of my cultural identity. 1 2 3 4 5

I am proud that I am an Armenian 1 2 3 4 5

When I talk about Armenians, I mostly say “we Armenians” 1 2 3 4 5

In many respects, I am like the other Armenians. 1 2 3 4 5

I am happy that I am Turkish. 1 2 3 4 5

I feel some bond between myself and other Turks 1 2 3 4 5

Being like a Turkish person does not define what kind of a person I am. 1 2 3 4 5

When people talk about the Turks, I feel as if they talk about me. 1 2 3 4 5

Being like a Turkish person is an important dimension of my cultural identity. 1 2 3 4 5

I regret that I am like a 1 2 3 4 5 Turkish person.

When I talk about the Turks, I mostly say “we Turks.” 1 2 3 4 5

In many respects, I am like the other Turks. 1 2 3 4 5

7) All in all, do you feel Only More more Armenian or more Equally both More Turkish Only Turkish Armenian Armenian Turkish?

8) In what type of situations or circumstances do you feel more like Armenian?

9) In what type of situations or circumstances do you feel more like Turkish?

10) Circle the relevant number for the following statements.

I definitely I don’t I definetly Neutral I agree don’t agree agree agree

I know Armenian culture very well. 1 2 3 4 5

I know Turkish culture very well. 1 2 3 4 5

I know most Armenian traditions and I live by them. 1 2 3 4 5

I know most Turkish traditions and I live by them. 1 2 3 4 5

I know Armenian social customs, rules and norms of cultural behavior. 1 2 3 4 5

I know Turkish social customs, rules and norms of cultural behavior. 1 2 3 4 5

Armenian values, such as Armenian flag and history) mean a lot to me. 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish values, such as Turkish flag and history, mean a lot to me. 1 2 3 4 5

Armenian culture is an important component of me. 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish culture is an important component of me. 1 2 3 4 5

Armenian culture has a positive effect on my life. 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish culture has a positive effect on my life. 1 2 3 4 5

I live in accordance with Armenian cultural norms and values. 1 2 3 4 5

I live in accordance with Turkish cultural norms and values. 1 2 3 4 5

I listen to Armenian music. 1 2 3 4 5

I listen to Turkish music. 1 2 3 4 5

I listen to Armenian news. 1 2 3 4 5

I listen to Turkish news. 1 2 3 4 5

I prefer Armenian food. 1 2 3 4 5

I prefer Turkish food. 1 2 3 4 5

In my spare time, I participate in Armenian cultural activities. 1 2 3 4 5

In my spare time, I participate in Turkish cultural activities. 1 2 3 4 5

PART 3: SOCIAL NETWORK

11) Circle the relevant number for the following statements.

I definitely I don’t I definetly Neutral I agree don’t agree agree agree

I have many Armenian friends 1 2 3 4 5

I have many Turkish friends. 1 2 3 4 5

In my spare time, I go to places, such as clubs or in agoump3where I can meet Armenian people. 1 2 3 4 5

In my spare time, I go to places, such as clubs, tea houses where I can meet Turkish people. 1 2 3 4 5

I am a member of an Armenian club/ organisation. 1 2 3 4 5

I am a member of a Turkish club / organisation. 1 2 3 4 5

There are many Armenians in the suburb I live. 1 2 3 4 5

I feel much more comfortable among Armenians. 1 2 3 4 5

I feel much more comfortable among the Turks. 1 2 3 4 5

I know the Turks very well. 1 2 3 4 5

I know the Armenian very well. 1 2 3 4 5

I like the way Armenians relate to each other. 1 2 3 4 5

3Agoump is the place where all the Armenian people gather during their participation to the different cultural activities taking place within the community. Is an important center of Armenianess.

I like the way Turks relate to each other. 1 2 3 4 5

I have close relations with my family. 1 2 3 4 5

I have close relations with my Armenian friends. 1 2 3 4 5

I have close relations with my Turkish friends. 1 2 3 4 5

I have many Armenian friends whom I can call real friends. 1 2 3 4 5

I have many Turkish friends whom I can call real friends. 1 2 3 4 5

When I have personal problems, I share it with my Armenian friends. 1 2 3 4 5

When I have personal problems, I share it with my Turkish friends. 1 2 3 4 5

When I need help in my daily life, I ask help from Armenian friends. 1 2 3 4 5

When I need help in my daily life, I ask help from Turkish friends. 1 2 3 4 5

All in all, are you more in contact Only More Equally More Only with the Turkish or with the Armenian people? Armenian Armenian both Turkish Turkish

12) Circle the relevant number for the following statements.

I definitely I don’t I definetly Neutral I agree don’t agree agree agree

If Armenian people in Turkey stop speaking Armenian, they would lose their Armenian identity. 1 2 3 4 5

If Armenian people in Turkey stop practicing Christianity, they would lose their Armenian identity. 1 2 3 4 5

If Armenian people in Turkey lose their Armenian norms and values, they would lose their Armenian identity. 1 2 3 4 5

The Armenians in Turkey can act together as a group. 1 2 3 4 5

The Armenians in Turkey has strong group solidarity. 1 2 3 4 5

In order to take care of their interests, the Armenians in Turkey have sufficient number of organisations and foundations. 1 2 3 4 5

Armenian organisations and foundations 1 2 3 4 5 contribute positively to Armenian community.

The Armenians in Turkey always support each other. 1 2 3 4 5

The Armenians in Turkey are well- represented in the politics. 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish people usually think negatively about the Armenians 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish people value Armenian language and culture. 1 2 3 4 5

Turkish people are negative towards Armenian language and culture. 1 2 3 4 5

Turks discriminate against the Armenians. 1 2 3 4 5

There are sufficient facilitities to teach Armenian language in Turkey. 1 2 3 4 5

In the suburb that I live, there are sufficient number of Armenian organisations, shops, etc. 1 2 3 4 5

We have sufficient Armenian media in Turkey (newspaper, tv, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5

If an Armenian has a problem, s/he would know that s/he can get help from the Armenian community. 1 2 3 4 5

In 20-30 years, Armenians in Turkey will be much better organised and there will be more solidarity between them. 1 2 3 4 5

In 20-30 years, Armenians will not exist as 1 2 3 4 5 a community, group identity will be lost.

PART 4: ARMENIAN-TURKISH LANGUAGE USE

13) Circle the relevant number for the following statements.

In which language do you interact Always Mostly Mostly Always Equal mostly with the following persons? Turkish Turkish Armenian Armenian

With your father? 1 2 3 4 5

With your mother? 1 2 3 4 5

With your siblings? 1 2 3 4 5

With your Armenian friends? 1 2 3 4 5

With your Armenian friends in your 1 2 3 4 5 suburb?

With people in Armenian businesses? 1 2 3 4 5

With people in agoump? 1 2 3 4 5

With people in the church? 1 2 3 4 5

With Armenian people on the 1 2 3 4 5 telephone?

When the following people speak to Always Mostly Mostly Always you, in which language do they Equal speak? Turkish Turkish Armenian Armenian

Your father? 1 2 3 4 5

Your mother? 1 2 3 4 5

Your siblings? 1 2 3 4 5

Your friends? 1 2 3 4 5

Your relatives? 1 2 3 4 5

Your Armenian neighbours? 1 2 3 4 5

Always Mostly Mostly Always In which language do you mostly..? Equal Turkish Turkish Armenian Armenian think? 1 2 3 4 5 dream? 1 2 3 4 5 count, calculate? 1 2 3 4 5 read books? 1 2 3 4 5 read newspapers 1 2 3 4 5 watch tv? 1 2 3 4 5 listen to radio? 1 2 3 4 5 write? 1 2 3 4 5

Which language do you Always Mostly Mostly Always mostly prefer speaking Equal Turkish Turkish Armenian Armenian when you are? tired? 1 2 3 4 5 stressed? 1 2 3 4 5 angry? 1 2 3 4 5 in a hurry? 1 2 3 4 5 arguing? 1 2 3 4 5 happy? 1 2 3 4 5 confused? 1 2 3 4 5

How important is Armenian Only More More Only to do the following in Equal Turkish Turkish Armenian Armenian Turkey?

To Make Friends 1 2 3 4 5

To Make Money 1 2 3 4 5

To Study 1 2 3 4 5

To Find a Job 1 2 3 4 5

To Get a Better Education 1 2 3 4 5

To Live in Turkey 1 2 3 4 5

To Have a Say in the Society 1 2 3 4 5

To Rear Children 1 2 3 4 5

To Be Accepted in the 1 2 3 4 5 Armenian Community

To Speak to Armenian Friends 1 2 3 4 5

To be Accepted by Turkish 1 2 3 4 5 people

To Speak to Work Colleagues 1 2 3 4 5

To Travel 1 2 3 4 5

To Do Trade 1 2 3 4 5

What do you think of Turkish More Only Turkish More Turkish Both the same Only Armenian and Armenian? Armenian

It sounds nice 1 2 3 4 5

It sounds friendly 1 2 3 4 5

It sounds distinguished 1 2 3 4 5

It sounds polite 1 2 3 4 5

It sounds pleasant 1 2 3 4 5

It sounds modern 1 2 3 4 5

END OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE – THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP

 This questionnaire was for the Armenian residents in Turkey. For the Armenian residents in Greece there was an identical one but instead of Turkey the questionnaire mentioned Greece and instead of Turkish, Greek. The questionnaires were given in bilingual form. In case of Athens both in Armenian and Greek and in case of Istanbul both in Armenian and Turkish. The Armenian and Greek translations were made by the author whereas the Turkish translation from Dr. Kutlay Yagmur.