ANDBOOK OF Language [7 Ethnic Identity Edited by JOSHUA A. FISHMAN New York • Oxford Oxford University Press 1999 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 141 Can Ethnicity Be Changed? There are two polar positions to explain ethnic phenomena. One ofthese empha­ sizes the changeable aspects of ethnicity. According to this view, people are seen as acknowledging their ethnic identity only when they consider it to be useful for themselves. For example, if it is easier to get a job or an apartment by changing ethnic characteristics, people will do it, if possible. In other words, a language which hinders an individual's personal security and well-being will more easily be given up. In this perspective, modern man is (often exaggeratedly) viewed as Social Psychology "a shrewd calculator of membership benefits" (Fishman 1989: 37). However, if we would acknowledge our ethnic identity only when that brings us clear benefits, why would members of some ethnic minorities rather starve to KARMELA LIEBKIND death or burn themselves than give up their ethnicity? The other perspective views ethnicity as comprising irrational, deep-seated allegiances, attachments to kin, territory, or religion. Ethnicity is seen as part of the herd instinct of human pri­ mates, ordinarily unquestioned and taken for granted but forcefully activated in times of stress or threat to group life. In a sense, it is true that both of these positions are examples of the unneces­ sary polarization ofinherently complementary aspects ofhuman life. It seems clear by now that ethnicity can be manipulated, although it cannot be created situ­ What Is Ethnicity? ationally out of nothing. A person's ethnicity is ascribed in the sense that one cannot choose the ethnic group into which one is born, but it is achieved to the In dealing with language and ethnic identity, we touch upon two major concepts extent that the meaning it acquires for one's total identity can also be a matter of within the social sciences which have been given numerous different definitions: choice. ethnicity and identity. Ethnicity is often seen as the focus of identity. All people are members ofone ethnic group or another, but ethnic-group membership is more often associated with minority than with majority group status. Ethnic Identity as Social Identity As a term, ethnicity has its roots primarily in anthropology and ethnology. Usually, an ethnic group is defined on the basis ofso-called objective criteria, that One of the major cognitive tools individuals use to define themselves vis-a.-vis is, biological, geographical, linguistic, cultural, or religious characteristics. How­ the world in which they live is social categorization: ordering the social environ­ ever, cultures change, but the continuation of group boundaries themselves may ment by grouping persons in a manner that makes sense to the individual. Indi­ be more long-standing. For example, third- and fourth-generation immigrants in viduals perceive themselves as belonging to social groups, and recognition of the United States are generally quite unlike their first-generation forebears, even membership in these groups carries with it a knowledge of the values, positive or though they still often define themselves as members of their ancestral ethnic negative, that are attached to these groups. Within the social psychology of iden­ group. Subjective criteria seem to be more important than objective ones. An eth­ tity, a person's self-image is seen to have two components, personal identity and nic group could be defined simply as any group ofpeople who identify themselves social identity. The latter derives from membership in various groups. Ethnic or are in any way identified as Italian, Polish, Indian, Greek, and so forth. One identity can be defined simply as the ethnic component of social identity. Social can consider oneself to be a Greek-American without understanding the Greek identity, in turn, is that part of an individual's self-concept which derives from language, without practicing the Greek Orthodox religion, and even without lik­ his or her membership in social groups. We try to achieve a positive sense of so­ ing Greek food. cial identity by trying to perceive our own group as favorably distinct from other Ethnicity is also a matter of subjective belief in common ancestry. Members collectivities on valued dimensions. This is called the need for positive distinc­ of ethnic groups often have a subjective belief in their comm'on descent. It tiveness (TajfeI1978). does not matter whether or not an objective blood relationship really exists, There are important psychological differences between the actions ofindividu­ Ethnic membership differs from the kinship group precisely by being a presumed als as individuals and their actions as group members. The transition from personal identity. to social identity is a psychological process. As a consequence of this transition, 140 142 DISCIPLINE 8' TOPIC PERSPECTIVES SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 143 the interpersonal interaction between two individuals changes into intergroup porarily switch to another language, abandon their language completely, or stub­ behavior, which implies interaction in terms of group identifications. The key bornly stick to their own language? These questions came more strongly into the feature of this intergroup behavior is depersonalization; the two individuals in­ focus of research with the general renaissance of ethnicity. volved react both to themselves and to each other not as differentiated individual When the first textbook on the social psychology of language was written more persons but as exemplars of the common characteristics of their groups. than twenty years ago, it took somewhat fewer than 200 pages to present the field. Today, no single author could do justice to the whole field, as amply demonstrated by the first Handbook of Language and Social Psychology (Giles and Robinson Language Groups in Contact: 1990). The social psychology of language focuses on the roles of motives, beliefs, Alternative Strategies of Individuals and identity in individual language behavior. It tries to link language and ethnic identity together and studies how this identity is formed, presented, and main­ Berry (1990) has identified four alternative acculturation strategies open to mi­ tained. Ethnic or ethnolinguistic identity is involved in all social psychological norities in contact with majorities. Depending on whether or not the minority research on language, even if the research deals with such diverse topics as eth­ members wish to remain culturally as before (in terms of language, identity, etc.) nic language attitudes, second language learning, or communication breakdown and whether or not they wish to have day-to-day interaction and good relation­ (Liebkind 1996). ships with mainstream society, the intergroup contact can result in integration, Credit for the birth of the social psychology of language goes primarily to assimilation, separation, or marginalization. In integration, some degree of cul­ Howard Giles and his colleagues (Giles and Johnson 1987). Giles introduced the tural integrity is maintained while one moves to participate as an integral part of so-called ethnolinguistic identity theory. This theory suggests that, when ethnic the larger social network. In assimilation, original cultural features (language, group identity becomes important for individuals, they may attempt to make them­ religion, etc.) are given up totally in favor of those of the majority. In separation, selves favorably distinct on dimensions such as language. Members of ethno­ the opposite is true; that is, no features of the majority culture are accepted, and linguistic groups, like those of other social categories, strive for positive social only the original minority culture is valued. In marginalization neither the ma­ identities to enhance their self-esteem. Thus members of such groups who value jority nor the minority can offer a satisfactory identity. In terms of language, it highly their own language may, in communicating with members from other could mean loss of original language without simultaneous sufficient acquisition groups, adopt various strategies ofso-called psycholinguistic distinctiveness, such of the dominant language. as accentuating their speech styles, switching to their in-group language, and so However, minority members may use different strategies in different areas of forth. life. For example, one may seek economic assimilation (in work), linguistic inte­ If, however, one's own language is a source of shame only, contributing prima­ gration (by way of bilingualism), and marital separation (by endogamy). This rily to a negative social identity, other strategies may be adopted. Some group implies that the minority can share some values with the majority without sacri­ members may use assimilation strategies and try to pass into and become mem­ ficing their minority culture. bers of the dominant group. "Passing" here means not only speaking the domi­ The result of the integration strategy is a truly bicultural identity. Although nant group language but also assimilating linguistically, that is, identifying with this means that elements of the person's original identity are seen as negotiable the speakers of the dominant language. and that identity loss does not hinge on any particular marker (such as language), it also means that, in true integration, the individual has accepted his or her eth­ nic and cultural heritage (Le., maintained identification with the ethnic group), Language