Language affected our participants’ sense of belonging, identity formation, and societal integration. The participants highlighted how language can serve as both a bridge and a barrier in the process of acculturation. Preservation of their native languages was equated with the preservation of their cultural heritage while proficiency in the English language was viewed as the entryway to belonging and acceptance in broader American society. Conversely, the loss of their mother tongue meant a loss of cultural identity, while the inability to speak English fluently, or speaking it with a non-Western accent, made them vulnerable to prejudice and marginalization.
The demands of survival, not language itself, often kept our participants from telling their stories. This, combined with a language divide between generations, may have contributed to a sense of distance, leaving key aspects of adaptation, loss, and identity unshared.
Language is a pivotal element in the process of acculturation. Our Lao and Korean participants highlighted how language can serve as both a bridge and a barrier, affecting their sense of belonging, identity formation, and societal integration.
A number of participants stated that speaking their native language, whether Lao or Korean, connects them to their respective cultural community and heritage. Proficiency in their native language was also seen as a measure of their children’s retention of their heritage, with a lack of fluency perceived as a shift toward Americanization and, for some, a gradual erasure of their cultural roots.
Conversely, English proficiency was viewed as essential for social recognition and participation in broader society. Many of the Lao and Korean elders attended English classes before or upon arriving in the U.S. However, over time, the demands of work and family and the prominence of their native language in their immediate environments led most to discontinue learning the language over time. The participants—all of whom have lived in the U.S. for multiple decades and contributed to their neighborhoods and communities—directly correlated their lack of English fluency or non-native accent with experiences of disregard, discrimination, and being perceived as perpetual foreigners. For some, these challenges limited their self-expression and autonomy and, in some cases, led to varying degrees of internalized shame and discomfort in social or civic settings outside their cultural communities. Others, despite their limited English proficiency, were able to seek support from fellow community members and manage societal and occupational obligations effectively.
Beyond specific languages, many of our participants did not focus on putting their experiences into words, as life was often simply about survival and circumstances did not lend themselves to self-expression. This, combined with a linguistic divide between the first generation and the younger 1.5 and second generations, may have contributed to a sense of distance, as important aspects of adaptation, loss, and identity were left unshared and, at times, untranslatable.
