Language Ideologies and Linguistic Practices of Transgenerational Return Migrants in Galicia

Abstract

This article explores transgenerational return migration to Galicia, Spain, focusing on participants of the Scholarships for Outstanding Youth Abroad (BEME) programme. It examines how descendants of Galician emigrants, primarily grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Galician emigrants to Latin America, engage with the Spanish and Galician languages. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 30 participants, the article explores participants’ language ideologies regarding Galician as a minoritised language and Spanish as a global language. This article highlights the role of language as a symbolic resource in transgenerational return migration, offering a sociolinguistic perspective to the understanding of this migration phenomenon.

1. Introduction

Return migration has garnered substantial attention from both academic and policy circles in recent decades (Wessendorf 2007; Tsuda 2009; King and Christou 2011a, 2011b; King and Kuschminder 2022; Kılınç 2022). While initial research within the field of migration studies was primarily centred on the extent to which first- and second-generation migrants assimilated into their host societies, more recent studies have shifted their focus to the phenomenon of second (and subsequent) generation migrants returning to their ancestral homelands (Pérez-Caramés and Domínguez-Mújica 2021). Termed the “return turn” (Kuschminder 2023), this shift in focus has yielded new insights into processes of identity formation and belonging in the context of migration and has led to a proliferation of terminologies in the scholarly literature, including ancestral return (Bovenkerk 1974), ethnic return (Tsuda 2009), and roots migration (Wessendorf 2007). The abundance of terms, as identified by Azevedo et al. (2022), reflects the varied nature of this phenomenon and the challenges of encapsulating its complexity within a singular definitional framework. For the purposes of this study, we adopt the term “transgenerational return” as proposed by Durand (2006), to specifically consider and incorporate the various generations of descendants implicated in return migration processes. Despite the expanding body of research in this field, a notable gap remains, specifically in the examination of how linguistic ideologies intersect with the experiences of transgenerational return migrants. The primary objective of this article, then, is to address this gap by shedding light on the interplay between language ideologies and transgenerational return migration, drawing on the sociolinguistic context of Galicia, an autonomous region in northwest Spain. By doing so, this article enhances theoretical understandings of transgenerational return migration and language ideologies while providing insights that can inform policy and practice in multilingual migration contexts.

Galicia is a historically bilingual region that has Spanish and Galician as co-official languages. However, globalisation and migratory trends have changed Galicia’s linguistic landscape, incorporating the languages of immigrant communities alongside local languages (Prego Vázquez and Zas Varela 2019). This evolving multilingualism renders Galicia an important case study for comprehending the sociolinguistic implications of transnational migration (DePalma and Pérez-Caramés 2018). In order to understand Galicia’s current linguistic dynamics, it is essential to consider its sociolinguistic history. Since the 16th century, Spanish has been the prestigious language in Galicia. This intensified during the 20th century, due primarily to the Franco dictatorship when Spanish was used mostly by urban elites, while Galician was stigmatised and linked to the rural, working class. With the advent of democracy, Galician revitalisation efforts enhanced positive attitudes towards Galician and the language competence of the Galician population. Nonetheless, Spanish largely remains positioned as a symbol of progress and modernity (Iglesias Álvarez 2012), with habitual use on the rise, particularly in urban areas, amongst younger demographics, and even in traditionally Galician-speaking rural regions—the latter potentially indicative of a process of (socio)linguistic substitution (Ramallo Fernández and Vázquez Fernández 2020). An exception to this trend is seen in young tertiary education students who show a slight decrease in Spanish usage (Ramallo Fernández and Vázquez Fernández 2020). Thus, Galicia’s current sociolinguistic context reveals widespread Galician language competence, which has not necessarily corresponded to an increase in usage; the shift towards Spanish endures, posing significant implications for the continued vitality of the Galician language.

Examining the interplay between Galicia’s linguistic diversity, emigration history, and resultant policies is crucial for understanding the region’s sociolinguistic dynamics. Galicia’s long history of emigration—spanning from the mid-19th century exodus of over a million individuals (Farías 2008) to the migration waves during the Franco dictatorship—has created a sizeable diaspora with shared Galician origins. Spanish legislative changes, namely the Spanish Law of Historical Memory (2007) and the Democratic Memory Law (2022), grant descendants of Spanish emigrants—not just limited to Galicians—the right to apply for Spanish nationality. These policy changes have enhanced possibilities for transgenerational return migration and are happening against the backdrop of Spain’s (and Galicia’s) ageing population. Seeing the demographic benefits of such legislative changes, the Galician government has implemented various policies to encourage the process of transgenerational return. Specifically, the Return Strategy 2020, most recently updated to the Return Strategy 2023–2026, aspires to bring back up to 30,000 individuals with Spanish nationality and proven Galician ancestry. In light of these policy shifts, Galician scholarship has explored terminology to describe descendants of Galicians abroad who choose to resettle in their ancestral homeland (Oso Casas et al. 2008). Past works used the term false returnees (falsos retornados) (Lamela et al. 2005), but it has since been argued that this label does not adequately capture the complexity of this migration dynamic. Hence, Oso Casas et al. (2018) put forward the concept of return to the roots (retorno a las raíces) migration.

One key component of Galicia’s Return Strategy 2020 is the Scholarships for Outstanding Youth Abroad (Bolsas Excelencia Mocidade Exterior—BEME) initiative, where graduates of Spanish nationality who can trace their lineage back to Galicia are awarded scholarships to undertake a master’s degree in one of Galicia’s three universities. This programme is not exclusively targeted towards transgenerational migrants but is also extended to include first-generation migrants who left Galicia in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis (primarily moving to other European countries, the United States, and Canada). Notwithstanding, the overwhelming majority of applicants to the BEME scheme are transgenerational return migrants, largely being grandchildren or great-grandchildren of Galicians who migrated to Latin America during the mid-20th century seeking better economic prospects.1 Since its inception in 2017, the BEME initiative has attracted increasing interest, underlined by the fact that nearly 1000 scholarships have been awarded. This number bears testament to the high demand and competitive nature of the scheme, with the number of applications seeing a consistent rise each year; the year 2020 saw a particularly high level of interest, with the ratio of applications to scholarships awarded standing at two to one.

Against this backdrop, this research examines the link between language ideologies and transgenerational return migration within Galicia’s sociolinguistic landscape. By focusing on BEME scholarship recipients, this study explores how these individuals engage with discourses about Galician as a minoritised language and Spanish as a globally dominant language. In examining these processes, this study sheds light on the role of language ideologies in shaping the experiences of transgenerational return migrants, as well as the influence these ideologies have on how language is leveraged as a symbolic resource in contexts of transgenerational return migration. This exploration of linguistic ideologies of transgenerational return migrants, particularly within the Galician sociolinguistic context, opens a new area of study, providing insights into how language ideologies can shape migrants’ experiences and influence processes of societal integration.

2. Language Ideologies and Return Migration

Language ideologies have become a central topic in sociolinguistic research over the past several decades, focusing on how societal beliefs and values are intertwined with language use and perception. This is well encapsulated by Silverstein (1979, p. 193), who notes that language ideologies are “sets of beliefs about language articulated by users as a rationalisation or justification of perceived structure and use”. Similarly, Woolard has contributed significantly to the understanding of language ideologies, emphasising the impact of linguistic beliefs and practices on the construction of social identities and the perpetuation of social structures (see for example Woolard 2008, 2016). This study adopts Kroskrity’s definition of language ideologies as “beliefs, feelings, and conceptions about language structure and use, which often index the political economic interests of individual speakers, ethnic and other interest groups, and nation-states” (Kroskrity 2010, p. 192). This definition not only underscores the links between language and identity, aesthetics, morality, and epistemology (Woolard 1998, p. 3) but also situates language ideologies within broader socio-cultural and socio-political contexts.

Understanding the concept of dominant language ideologies is specifically central to this study. Dominant language ideologies are beliefs about language that reflect and uphold the interests of powerful social, economic, or political groups (Martínez 2013, p. 278), thus helping to maintain existing social structures and power relations (Jaffe 2008). It is important to clarify that dominant ideologies do not merely reflect the beliefs of powerful groups; rather, they are widely accepted, shared beliefs that shape the lived realities of a diverse range of groups (Gal 1998, p. 321). As a result, such ideologies are often naturalised, reproduced over time, and ultimately accepted as common sense (Dubois and Boudreau 2007, p. 104).

The ideology of the standard presents a key example of a dominant language ideology. Lippi-Green (1997, p. 64) defines this as a bias for an abstract, uniform, idealised form of language that is imposed and upheld by dominant institutions. This ideology portrays language as a fixed system (Dubois and Boudreau 2007; Jaffe 2008), granting legitimacy to the standard language and, thereby, perpetuating existing linguistic hierarchies. This affects how individuals perceive and value linguistic practices and languages, their own included. Milroy (2001, p. 536) highlights that in “standard language cultures”, the acknowledgment of the standard becomes deeply ingrained in individuals’ minds, so much so that to reject it is to reject the prevailing culture. This has significant repercussions, especially in contexts of migration, where being part of a shared culture plays a role societal participation and inclusion.

In a similar vein, another example of a dominant ideology is the ideology of monolingualism, which perpetuates the notion that the existence of a single language within a community is the normative and ideal state, often marginalising multilingual practices (Gal 2006). This ideology usually elevates the status of a nation’s dominant or official language, and as such subordinates minority or non-standard languages. Ideologies of monolingualism can contribute to shaping attitudes towards language and even policies around language use, effectively fostering environments that marginalise speakers of minority languages. Thus, while seemingly focused on language, dominant ideologies are deeply interwoven with broader socio-political structures and can perpetuate inequalities and social exclusion.

The impact of dominant language ideologies becomes particularly salient in the context of migration (Bermingham 2021). Migration signifies more than physical movement; it embodies a complex social, cultural, and linguistic transition. Within this shift, language ideologies take centre stage. As people move through different places and cultures, they navigate through an array of language ideologies, making this navigation a critical part of their migration experience (Blommaert 2010). Language ideologies mediate migrants’ language practices, influencing the languages they opt to use; when, where, and with whom they use them; and the values ascribed to these choices. As such, migrants’ interactions with language ideologies shape their social integration, their social networks, and their identity construction (De Fina and Perrino 2013).

Examining these dynamics within the specific context of return migration provides an additional layer of complexity, as return migrants must negotiate their linguistic practices and ideologies in their ancestral homeland, a realm that is simultaneously familiar and foreign (Tsuda 2009). These encounters can result in linguistic insecurity and a sense of displacement, or contrarily, feelings of homecoming and belonging. As Kılınç (2022, p. 285) notes, the act of “returning to the homeland” is not always a simple or welcoming “homecoming” for return migrants. The journey to their ancestral land can, in fact, frequently be a complicated and disconcerting experience, leading to feelings of disappointment (King and Christou 2010, p. 111); language ideologies play a key role in this respect.

The situation becomes even more complex for transgenerational return migrants, who must negotiate language ideologies in a place they have never physically inhabited but have constructed through familial narratives and cultural legacies. The focus on this specific population within this study provides an opportunity to deepen the theoretical understanding of language ideologies within migration studies. This research unpacks how transgenerational return migrants negotiate their linguistic realities and identities and how their language choices are influenced by historical, familial, and institutional contexts. Additionally, it provides insights into how language is leveraged as a symbolic resource within the context of transgenerational return migration, shedding light on the dynamics of language usage within migrant populations. In this way, this study contributes to ongoing theoretical discussions about the role of language in socio-cultural integration and identity construction in migration contexts.

3. Methodology

As noted above, the central focus of this research lies in an educational initiative entitled Scholarships for Outstanding Youth Abroad (Bolsas Excelencia Mocidade Exterior—BEME). Established by the Galician autonomous government, these scholarships facilitate transgenerational return migration by offering scholarships to individuals of Galician descent living abroad to study a master’s degree in Galicia. Recognised as a means of addressing demographic decline and preserving cultural heritage, the BEME programme provides a fertile ground for studying the sociolinguistic dynamics of transgenerational return migration.

Participants were selected following the judgment sampling method (Hoffman 2013). In total, 30 scholarship recipients were interviewed; 26 of these were first-language speakers of Spanish and 4 were speakers of Portuguese from Brazil. All but one were under the age of 40 and either grandchildren or great-grandchildren of Galicians who had emigrated to Latin America. Specific demographic information relating to age, country of origin, and educational background can be found in

Table A1. Participant Profiles.

	Pseudonym	Age	Country of Origin	Initial Qualification	Master’s Degree	Location
1	Dora	28	Venezuela	Arts	Cultural Services	Lugo
2	Gonzalo	33	Argentina	Advertising	Cultural Services	Lugo
3	Laura	38	Argentina	Social Anthropology	Cultural Services	Lugo
4	Lorena	29	Argentina	Architecture	Project Management	Lugo
5	Miriam	30	Brazil	Arts	Cultural Services	Lugo
6	Sergio	26	Venezuela	Languages and Literatures	Cultural Services	Lugo
7	Sandra	31	Argentina	Industrial Engineering	Management of Small and Medium Enterprises	Vigo
8	Vera	42	Uruguay	Journalism	Cultural Services	Lugo
9	Bibiana	35	Argentina	Education	Education Management and Innovation	A Coruña
10	Celia	25	Uruguay	Psychology	Neuroscience	Santiago
11	Carla	25	Argentina	Marketing	MBA	A Coruña
12	Diego	32	Argentina	Dentistry	Nutrition	Vigo
13	Fátima	30	Brazil	Psychology	Business Management	A Coruña
14	Luisa	38	Brazil	Pharmacy	Health Care and Research	A Coruña
15	María	28	Venezuela	Musicology	Cultural Services	Lugo
16	Mario	24	Brazil	Law	Economics	Santiago
17	Nerea	37	Mexico	Art History	Educational Research: Diversity and Community Development	Santiago
18	Pedro	37	Argentina	Civil Engineering	Integrated Project Management	Pontevedra
19	Alicia	30	Argentina	Psychology	Psychology	Santiago
20	Juan	26	Panama	Computer Science	Systems Engineering	Santiago
21	Jorge	36	Uruguay	Architecture	Integrated Project Management	Pontevedra
22	Rodrigo	28	Costa Rica	Computer Science	Computer Engineering	Santiago
23	Sonia	36	Argentina	Sociology	Tourism	A Coruña
24	Domingo	24	Uruguay	Education	Education Management and Innovation	A Coruña
25	Lidia	25	Cuba	Computer Science	Computer Engineering	A Coruña
26	Dina	29	Argentina	Architecture	Integrated Project Management	A Coruña
27	Rogelio	34	Mexico	Psychology	Cultural Services	Lugo

in Appendix A. Overall, the age profile of scholarship holders was higher than that of master’s students in Galicia; most were over the age of 30. Another differentiating characteristic of this group when compared to their Galician counterparts is their work experience; all interviewees reported having worked before coming to Galicia. Typically, they began their careers while pursuing their undergraduate degrees and secured employment in their fields post-graduation, both in the private and public sectors. Job instability in their home countries, however, was a common motivator for applying for a BEME scholarship.

Among the 30 interviewed BEME recipients, 14 were still completing their master’s degrees while 16 had finished their studies at the time of the interview. Of those who had graduated, two had returned to their home countries after living in Galicia for several years. Months after the interviews were carried out, we were informed that three more interviewees had left Galicia to work in Madrid or Barcelona. Moreover, a year post-interview, another former student had relocated to the Netherlands. In short, five out of the six individuals who eventually left Galicia after completing their master’s degrees did not do so immediately upon graduation. Instead, they remained in the region for at least two additional years before relocating. The remaining students were undecided about their future plans, although several indicated that they did not wish to return to their countries of origin. Instead, they were considering relocating elsewhere in Spain or moving to other destinations in Europe, the United States, or Canada.

Employment prospects in Galicia for these graduates varied widely. Those in computer science, and to a lesser extent some engineering fields, reported finding employment with relative ease, mirroring the local job market for Galician graduates in these disciplines. Others secured informal work or temporary contracts, particularly in cultural management roles such as tourism or museum work. A few took positions in sectors requiring lower qualifications than those they were trained for, such as hospitality or retail. A significant barrier to employment for these individuals was the non-recognition of the degrees awarded in their countries of origin. Only two of the thirty participants had completed the degree validation process, known as homologación in Spain. Without this certification, their qualifications were not fully recognised, placing them at a disadvantage in the Galician job market compared to local graduates.

The participants had come into contact with oral varieties of the Galician language through their family members in Latin America and relatives living in Galicia, but in many cases, were also familiar with the formal register of the language through travel, Galician television, or Galician cultural centres in Latin America. We used semi-structured life story interviews as a data collection tool; these interviews were conducted either in person or virtually, then recorded and transcribed for subsequent analysis. Spanish was chosen as the interview language since the participants were generally more fluent in Spanish than in Galician. Two participants independently opted to speak Galician. Furthermore, during an interview with a Brazilian scholarship holder, the interviewer switched to Galician to facilitate communication due to the close linguistic relationship between Galician and Portuguese. However, the participant chose to continue the interview in Spanish.

The interview protocol followed a chronological approach with 10–12 open-ended questions structured in three sections. The first section examined participants’ connections to Galicia and their experiences with the Galician language before coming to Galicia under the BEME scholarship programme. The second section focused on their time as postgraduate students in Galicia and their linguistic experiences (with Galician and Spanish) in the university system and in their personal and work lives. Finally, we focused on the period after the BEME programme, exploring why participants did (or did not) choose to stay living in Galicia, as well as the relevance that linguistic factors had on this decision.

Following transcription, we used NVivo software for thematic data analysis, employing Elemental and Affective coding techniques as outlined by Saldaña (2009). We identified patterns and themes in the participants’ narratives, particularly those related to their experiences with, and attitudes towards, the Galician and Spanish languages. For example, recurring themes such as the role of language in identity formation, the social prestige associated with different languages, and the role of language in shaping participants’ integration and belonging in Galicia emerged from the data. The excerpts that will be discussed in the subsequent data analysis section were specifically chosen to illustrate these central themes, serving as examples of the broader patterns identified, thereby providing key examples of the thematic findings. Complementing NVivo’s thematic analysis, we applied Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to examine the social and ideological underpinnings of the participants’ language use. As defined by Wodak (2001, p. 3), CDA facilitates the exploration of transparent and opaque structural relationships of power, control, and dominance manifested in language. Thus, in this study, CDA allowed for an examination of how power relations, identity, and ideologies were enacted, reproduced, or challenged in the participants’ discourses. We paid attention to how participants constructed their linguistic identities, how they positioned the Galician and Spanish languages in their narratives, and how they discursively managed the sociolinguistic environment they encountered in Galicia.

Our research methodology is anchored in viewing language as a form of social action revealing speaker ideologies through linguistic practices (Moyer 2008). Semi-structured life story interviews thus serve as our key method, treated not as truth-revealing tools, but as “situated performances” that capture the complex interaction between participants’ migration trajectories and linguistic practices (Heller 2008). The versatility of this approach allows us to examine the interplay between the Galician and Spanish languages within participant narratives and how these narratives reflect their language ideologies. We are aligned with Talmy’s (2010) proposition that interview data should be understood as collaborative and co-constructed, thereby acknowledging narratives as situated discursive performances providing insights into speaker positioning within language discourses. Ethical considerations were paramount throughout data collection and analysis. All participants gave informed consent prior to the interviews. Identifiable information was redacted from transcripts, and pseudonyms were used to preserve anonymity. The research protocol was subject to ethical review board scrutiny to confirm its compliance with research ethics standards.

4. Data Analysis

In this section, we explore the relationship between language ideologies and the experiences of transgenerational return migrants in Galicia. The section is structured to unfold progressively, beginning with an examination of the impact of family dynamics on language transmission, revealing how participants’ early interactions with the Galician language shaped their connections to their ancestral heritage. We then examine the emotional ties the participants had to language, considering how these connections extend beyond communication, influencing their decisions to move to Galicia and impacting on their experiences of integrating into their ancestral homeland. Subsequently, the analysis turns to assess the role of language in processes of social inclusion or exclusion, observing how language can both bridge and construct divides. The final part of our analysis turns to the practical strategies migrants employ to adapt to the sociolinguistic context of Galicia. This includes linguistic modifications and language choices in response to the challenges presented in various professional, academic, and everyday contexts.

4.1. Language Ideologies and Identity Formation

4.1.1. Family Dynamics and Emotional Connections to Language

A critical aspect to consider is how participants’ language ideologies and expectations upon return are shaped by the narratives of their ancestors, most notably their grandparents, whose migration journeys led them from Galicia to Latin America, and from rural areas to urban centres. These migration trajectories were, for the most part, definitive and did not involve a return to Galicia. As regards Galician language maintenance, this was usually seen within the private sphere of the grandparents and their interactions with fellow Galicians, compounded by the widespread endogamy of first-generation Galicians in Latin America, especially in Argentina (Oso Casas et al. 2018). Thus, our data revealed strong links between the role of grandparents (predominantly grandmothers) in the upbringing of the participants, and the extent to which Galician is present in their lives. Where the family bond is stronger, descendants often become passive Galician speakers, highlighting the role of grandparents in preserving linguistic heritage and emphasising the generational transmission of minority languages within families (Fishman 1970).

Mi vínculo con Galicia, antes de viajar a Galicia, fue profundamente afectivo. Mis abuelos maternos son los dos gallegos, de Ourense, y prácticamente me criaron ellos, entonces […] Entre ellos hablaban en gallego, sobre todo cuando se enojaban […] que es cuando sale más. Y siempre hablaron en castellano con acento muy marcadamente, y con palabras y modismos, gallegos. Entonces para mí el gallego, si bien no lo sabía hablar, como que lo entendía por ósmosis.

(Lorenzo)

My bond with Galicia, before travelling to Galicia, was deeply emotional. My maternal grandparents are both Galician, from Ourense, and they practically raised me, so… […] They spoke Galician among themselves, especially when they were angry […] which is when it comes out the most… And they always spoke in Spanish with a very strong accent, and with Galician words and idioms. So for me, Galician, although I didn’t know how to speak it, I understood it by osmosis.

(Lorenzo)

Lorenzo’s narrative reveals an emotional connection to the Galician language, fostered by his grandparents. Despite not speaking Galician actively, his passive understanding represents a link to his cultural heritage. However, the fact that this language maintenance occurred in private, rather than in community-based practices, points to a diaspora identity maintained within the confines of home—a dynamic that may complicate the process of cultural reintegration during return migration.

Similarly, Dina’s case illustrates how the generation of her grandparents upheld Galician linguistic practices in their daily life. Notably, their linguistic practices, as perceived by their grandchildren, often take on a hybrid nature.

Mi abuela vivió años en mi casa y ella nunca dejó de hablar en gallego. De hecho, yo no me daba cuenta que hablaba en gallego hasta que de grande mis amigas me decían “Che, no entiendo a tu abuela”, y ahí me di cuenta que, claro, mezclaba el castellano y el gallego, y para mí era normal.

(Dina)

My grandmother lived in my house for years and she never stopped speaking Galician. In fact, I didn’t realise that I spoke Galician until my friends told me when I grew up “I don’t understand your grandmother”, and that’s when I realised that, of course, I was mixing Spanish and Galician, and for me it was normal.

(Dina)

Dina’s remarks reveal the sociolinguistic dynamics within transgenerational family structures. For Dina, the home becomes a microcosm for cultural and linguistic transmission, where grandparents play a key role in preserving linguistic heritage (Fishman 1970). Furthermore, the external recognition of Dina’s bilingualism—her friends’ comments about not understanding her grandmother—reflects the societal dimension of language ideologies. This interaction exemplifies how language practices, often internalised within family settings, become sites of social negotiation and identity formation in broader community settings.

Beyond the familial realm, the emotional significance of language also manifests in broader societal interactions. This aspect is particularly evident in the experiences of participants like Bibiana, whose response to the use of Galician in official settings reinforces her sense of belonging.

En ese momento, recién llegada y todo, tenía una emoción con todo […] escucharlo [al Secretario Xeral de Emigración] hablar en gallego. Como que no me chocó. Fue como escuchar a mis abuelos, me conectó con un montón de cosas […] Creo que si ahora lo escuchara entendería mil veces más, porque ya el oído está distinto, pero… Pero no, lo sentí como […] “bienvenido a Galicia”.

(Bibiana)

At that time, having just arrived and everything, I felt very emotional […] listening to him [the Secretary General for Emigration] speak in Galician. It didn’t really shock me. It was like listening to my grandparents, it connected me with a lot of things […] I think that if I listened to him now I would understand a thousand times more, because my ear is already different, but I felt like… “welcome to Galicia”.

(Bibiana)

Bibiana’s emotional response to an authority figure using Galician illustrates how language ideologies, shaped by both family influences and the socio-political context, do more than facilitate communication—they also foster a sense of belonging and social identity (Woolard 2008). Bibiana’s sense of being “welcomed to Galicia” speaks to an ideology where language acts as an important connector to a place. As such, for return migrants like Bibiana, hearing Galician in official capacities may reinforce feelings of belonging, potentially legitimising their return.

While Bibiana’s narrative reveals a receptive emotional connection to language, Sergio, in contrast, articulates a proactive stance towards using language as tool for identity construction.

Yo creo que mi interés aparte de profesional es también un… A través de la lengua me apropio un poco de esta identidad que ya estoy, digamos, construyendo, ¿vale? Digamos, cómo me modifico yo como persona en mi identidad, que ahora me siento gallego y de alguna manera por eso también quiero hablar gallego y siento que eso me acerca, digamos, a una forma de sentir y de pensar, que es más propia de esta tierra.

(Sergio)

I think that my interest, apart from being professional, is also a… Through language I appropriate a bit of this identity that I am already, let’s say, building, right? Let’s say, how I am modifying myself as a person in my identity, that now I feel Galician and in some way that’s why I also want to speak Galician and I feel that this brings me closer, let’s say, to a way of feeling and thinking that is more typical of this land.

(Sergio)

Sergio’s approach to language adoption is a strategic effort to redefine his identity in a transgenerational migration context. Sergio actively learns and uses Galician, demonstrating how language functions as a symbolic resource; through language, he asserts his Galician identity, implying that learning the language is connected to self-definition as much as communication.

In analysing the familial and emotional connections to language among transgenerational return migrants, the discourses of Lorenzo, Dina, Bibiana, and Sergio reflect how language ideologies shape their sense of identity and belonging. Lorenzo and Dina’s discourse, which details their grandparents’ fluid use of Galician and Spanish, challenges dominant language ideologies that often sanction code-switching and language mixing as deviant (Jaffe 2008). Instead, their narratives align with an ideology that perceives bilingualism and linguistic hybridity as natural, thereby contesting monolingual norms. Bibiana’s emotional reaction to hearing the official use of Galician highlights how language can serve as a bridge to cultural heritage and to foster a sense of belonging. Meanwhile, Sergio’s proactive engagement with the Galician language as part of a broader process of identity exploration highlights the role of standard language cultures in migration contexts, as outlined by Milroy (2001), where acceptance within a shared cultural narrative contributes to processes of societal inclusion.

4.1.2. Linguistic Identity and Integration

Having established the emotional significance of language and the importance of the grandparent generation in language maintenance, we now turn to the role of language in linguistic integration. Specifically, this section focuses on how language ideologies not only inform personal identity but also influence migrants’ experiences of social inclusion or exclusion.

In this first excerpt, Vera reflects on the influence of language ideologies on her experience of integration in Galicia. Vera felt her linguistic variety marked her as a foreigner, an experience that resonated with her decision to return to Uruguay.

Muchas veces a la gente le tenía que explicar que yo no era de ahí, pedirle disculpas, volver como a preguntar… Y eso a mí me generaba también como un cierto desgaste, que a la larga desestimulaba mucho. Pero bueno, tuve también, y sí que había como… Mis compañeros […] se reían de mis expresiones. No una risa negativa en cuanto a señalarme, “jajaja, estás diciendo así”, sino que les causaba gracia, de una forma cómica […] como enriquecedora también para ellos a la hora de aprender cosas nuevas. Pero sí esta cuestión de que todo el tiempo, durante todo el año que trabajaba en [el supermercado] me estuvieron como consultando y preguntando sobre mi experiencia ahí, sobre “ah, porque vós sós uruguaya”, “ah, porque no sé qué”, y nunca me terminé de sentir… o sea, integrada y gallega en cuanto que ahora estoy trabajando acá. Pero siempre soy “la uruguaya”. La diferente, la otra, la que habla distinto, la que dice “palillo” en vez de “pinza”… Eso siempre se notó.

(Vera)

Many times I had to explain to people that I wasn’t from there, apologise, go back and ask questions… And that also caused me a certain amount of wear and tear, which in the long run discouraged me a lot. My colleagues […] laughed at my expressions. Not a negative laughter in terms of pointing at me, “hahaha, you’re saying it like that”, but they found it funny, in a comical and good way […] as if it was also enriching for them when it came to learning new things. But it’s true that all the time, during the whole year I was working at [the supermarket], they kept asking me about my experience “oh, because you’re Uruguayan”, and I never really felt… integrated and Galician. I am always “the Uruguayan”. The different one, the other one, the one who speaks differently, the one who says “palillo” instead of “pinza”… That was always noticeable.

(Vera)

Vera’s experiences reveal how her Uruguayan dialect positioned her as “other.” This narrative underlines a dynamic where language serves as a boundary marker, with Vera’s accent and dialect leading to a sense of alienation. The laughter she encountered, while not malicious, reinforced her outsider status, illustrating how linguistic features can impact an individual’s sense of belonging.

Similarly, Rogelio’s experience further explores this theme.

Cando cheguei eu sentía moito que era a miña terra, pero logo vin que non tanto […] Dunha banda si que hai moita xente coa que está todo moi ben, pero… Por exemplo o tema de que sempre é como que a xente se refire a min como “no teu país…”. Entón… “Entón cal é o meu país?” Non sei, é raro. Aquí son mexicano, en México son galego… Nunca estou no meu país. É moi raro.

(Rogelio)

When I arrived I felt very much that [Galicia] was my land, but then I saw that it wasn’t so much […] On the one hand, yes, there are many people with whom everything is very good, but…. For example, the thing that people always say to me “in your country…”. So… I don’t know, it’s strange. Here I‘m Mexican, in Mexico I‘m Galician… I‘m never in my country.

(Rogelio)

Rogelio’s narrative reveals the intersection of language, identity, and belonging for transgenerational migrants. The sense of displacement he experiences when he is marked as an outsider in both his ancestral and birth countries underscores the identity negotiations that occur; while Spanish, as a global language, may facilitate certain interactions, it does not necessarily lead to integration into the local community in Galicia.

The theme of linguistic features marking individuals as outsiders is further echoed in Luisa’s insights, highlighting the persistent nature of linguistic prejudice.

Y creo que siempre será el rótulo, la marca, que ella es fuera. Ella es brasileña. Y hablo [diferente]… Entón, siempre es de fuera. Yo tengo esa noción, que eso [no] puede acontecer. Eu son una persona que tengo nacionalidad aquí, que tengo los derechos. Gobernamentalmente hablando, oficial. Pero va a tener siempre una cosita, alí, que voy a tener siempre la característica.

(Luisa)

I think that will always be the label, the brand: she is an outsider. She is Brazilian. And I speak [differently]… So, she is always from abroad. I have this feeling that this [integration] can never happen. I am a person that has nationality here, I have rights. Governmentally speaking, officially. But I will always have a little thing, there, I will always have that [linguistic] characteristic.

(Luisa)

For Luisa’s, despite having Spanish nationality, her Brazilian accent marks her as an outsider, subjecting her to linguistic prejudice. Her narrative reflects the broader social perception where language is leveraged to draw lines between “us” and “them,” often leading to the exclusion of those marked as linguistically different, regardless of their citizenship status. Many participants expressed the sentiment that they were perpetually perceived as “non-native”, regardless of their official national status and Galician heritage.

Beyond academic settings, in the context of private-sector employment, several interviewees acknowledged that their non-peninsular Spanish accent could lead to potential disadvantages, as both employers and clients might perceive them as immigrants (broadly speaking) rather than Spanish nationals due to their accent. Specifically, during professional engagements, one interviewee who undertook an internship in a rural part of Galicia noted that most of the employees, as well as personnel from several client companies, predominantly communicated in Galician. Despite this, they switched to using Spanish in his presence, reinforcing his outsider status to him.

Sí fui incorporando [el gallego] ahora un poco en las prácticas, estoy haciendo las prácticas […] Y el trato interno, muchas veces de ellos, es en gallego, o mismo con los clientes. Entonces uno va adquiriendo algún conocimiento, o algunas palabras, algunas expresiones, algunas estructuras gramaticales. Pero en la vida en sí, cotidiana, si no fuera por esas prácticas no tendría mucho contacto con el gallego. […] Uno no puede vivir con la partida literal de nacimiento mostrando… Mi partida literal de nacimiento es mi voz, mi habla ahí. Sabes, ya inmediatamente soy argentino, y después en qué condiciones estoy aquí, si soy residente, o si estoy de turista, o si soy español por derecho. Digamos, la gente no lo sabe.

(Pedro)

I have been incorporating [Galician] now a little during my internship […] And the internal dealings, often with them, are in Galician, or even with the clients. So you acquire some knowledge, or some words, some expressions, some grammatical structures. But in everyday life, if it weren’t for these practices, I wouldn’t have much contact with Galician. […] One cannot go around with their birth certificate on show all the time… In Galicia, my de facto birth certificate is my voice, the way I speak. You know immediately I am Argentinean, but you don’t know if I am a resident, or if I am a tourist, or if I am Spanish by right.

(Pedro)

Pedro’s narrative reveals the struggle of being marked as an outsider due to his accent, despite his status as a Spanish national, shedding light on the linguistic context that transgenerational migrants navigate within professional settings. The acknowledgment of his accent as a “de facto birth certificate” illustrates how language not only serves as a means of communication but also as a marker of identity and origin that can reinforce feelings of otherness even within a shared linguistic space.

The experiences of Vera, Rogelio, and Luisa highlight the influence that dominant language ideologies can have on the integration processes of migrants, where such ideologies uphold the interests of powerful groups and maintain existing social structures (Martínez 2013; Jaffe 2008). Their narratives illustrate how standard language ideologies can serve to marginalize speakers of non-standard varieties, complicating their societal inclusion despite their having citizenship status. Pedro’s discourse highlights the challenges return migrants face, as Kılınç (2022) and King and Christou (2010) have noted, where the anticipated “homecoming’’ can instead reveal disconcerting realities—in this case, shaped by language ideologies. These narratives collectively reveal how individuals’ experiences are mediated by language ideologies that at times shape their sense of belonging or exclusion in their ancestral homeland.

4.2. Navigating Sociolinguistic Landscapes: Challenges and Adaptations

In this next section, we explore the sociolinguistic challenges faced by return migrants in Galicia and the linguistic adaptations they make in the face of such challenges.

4.2.1. Understanding the Dynamics of Minoritised Languages

Our analysis begins by exploring the challenges posed by engaging with Galician as a minoritised language. Before receiving the BEME scholarship, participants generally fell into one of two categories: they either had no formal education in Galician, having only a passive understanding gained from their grandparents, or they had no knowledge of the language at all. However, upon arriving in Galicia for their master’s studies, most participants did not pursue Galician language courses. Although many expressed a desire to learn Galician, various external factors—ranging from conflicts with their university schedules and prioritising other courses to the commitment to learning globally dominant languages like English—hindered their pursuit of learning Galician. Reflecting on this, one student recounted:

Yo cuando llegué me quería anotar a un curso de gallego, pero como estaba estudiando japonés, dije “bueno, no me voy a meter ya con otro idioma más”.

(Diego)

When I arrived, I wanted to sign up for a Galician course, but as I was studying Japanese, I said “well, I‘m not going to get involved in another language”.

(Diego)

Diego’s preference for learning Japanese over Galician exemplifies a pragmatic approach to language learning. His choice reflects a pattern among the transgenerational migrants in our study, where global languages are often favoured for their wider utility over local, minoritised languages like Galician. Despite an initial interest in the local language, practical considerations and personal interests frequently dictate language learning priorities, suggesting that the value placed on languages extends beyond cultural significance to their perceived benefits.

To this end, some participants noted that the utility of the Galician language was primarily linked to public sector employment in the region. Therefore, if they did not aspire to these positions, their incentive to learn Galician diminished. Such practical considerations influencing language choices are evident in Domingo’s decision-making process regarding learning Galician.

En ningún momento pasó por mi cabeza el interés de poder estudiar la lengua gallega. Si lo haría, lo haría por una cuestión de que por ejemplo en el caso de quedarme aquí, por una cuestión de posibles oposiciones […] si no, preferiría poder estudiar inglés.

(Domingo)

At no time did studying the Galician language cross my mind. If I did do it, I would do it for a reason that, for example, in the case of staying here, for applying for a job in the civil service. […] Otherwise, I would prefer to be able to study English.

(Domingo)

Domingo’s pragmatic choice—the prioritisation of learning languages that offer tangible benefits in the job market—mean that the motivation to learn a minoritised language like Galician can be extrinsic, rooted in professional requirements rather than a connection to cultural or linguistic heritage.

This pragmatic approach is compounded by the student demographic within the master’s programme, where the predominance of Latin American students (most of whom are BEME recipients), alongside other international students and students from different regions of Spain, leads to a preference for using Spanish. This reduces the frequency of Galician usage and, in turn, opportunities for participants to learn and practice Galician in everyday interactions, as observed by Lorenzo:

La verdad es que generalmente terminábamos estando siempre en grupitos por ahí argentinos, uruguayos, tal vez alguien de Brasil, por ahí, entonces terminábamos hablando siempre castellano

(Lorenzo)

The truth is that generally we ended up always being in little groups there, Argentinians, Uruguayans, maybe someone from Brazil, around there, so we always ended up speaking Spanish

(Lorenzo)

Lorenzo’s comments reveal the social dynamics influencing language use among transgenerational migrants. The gravitation towards Spanish indicates a reliance on a globally dominant language for intercultural communication, sidelining Galician. This practice may inadvertently contribute to the minoritisation of Galician, as the opportunities for its use and transmission are reduced even within its native context, highlighting the complexities of engaging with a minoritised language amidst a globally dominant one (Bermingham and Higham 2018).

In examining the discourses of Diego, Domingo, and Lorenzo, we highlight the influence of monolingual ideologies on engagement with Galician. These ideologies favour a singular, dominant language, often marginalising multilingual practices and privileging the use of globally dominant languages—in this case Spanish (Gal 2006). Lorenzo’s observations reveal a specific dynamic among BEME scholarship holders from Latin America and Brazil, where Spanish emerges as the lingua franca. This social practice limits opportunities for engaging with Galician, even among migrants who might be inclined to use it, and highlights the challenges of minority language maintenance within a social context where Spanish continues to be the dominant language.

4.2.2. Pragmatic Adaptations

This section explores the linguistic adaptations migrants make in response to their sociolinguistic context. Regardless of their country of origin, many interviewees recounted making deliberate changes to their way of speaking to mitigate perceptions of them as outsiders. For example, some participants reflected on the lexical adjustments they made.

En el ambiente laboral tuve que aprender distintos modismos y darme cuenta que en realidad […] llegás a la conclusión de que hablamos el mismo idioma pero no nos entendemos. Y eso choca. Porque yo hablaba mi uruguayo y ahí había gente que no me entendía. Porque las cosas se dicen diferente. Si yo te digo “auto”, vós entendés qué es un auto. Pero ahí se le dice “coche”. Pero eso es algo como muy básico y universal, pero por ejemplo, me pasó preguntar una vez cuándo empieza la semana de turismo, y la persona con la que estaba dialogando no me entendía a qué me refería. Y me estaba refiriendo a la semana santa.

(Vera)

In the work environment I had to learn different idioms and you come to the conclusion that we speak the same language but we don’t understand each other. And that’s shocking. Because I spoke my Uruguayan and there were people who didn’t understand me. Because things are said differently. If I tell you “auto”, you understand that it is a car. But here they say “coche”. But that’s something very basic and universal, but for example, I once asked when the tourism week starts, and the person I was talking to didn’t understand what I was referring to. And I was referring to Easter week.

(Vera)

Vera’s account reveals sociolinguistic dynamics that arguably extend beyond mere differences in vocabulary. While it appears that straightforward lexical substitutions could bridge the gap between her Uruguayan Spanish and the Spanish spoken in Galicia, Vera’s frustration suggests that the issue is not simply about understanding specific words like “auto” for “coche,” but rather about the broader acceptance of linguistic diversity within the host community. The reluctance or refusal to understand Vera could be interpreted as a form of linguistic gatekeeping, where local speakers reject and thus marginalize certain varieties of Spanish.

Similarly, other participants have had to confront not only the challenge of lexical comprehension but also the social implications of their regional varieties. Carla’s case further illustrates this.

Es mi forma de hablar, y si digo “cashe” no voy a decir “calle”, como dicen allá. No, no, ya lo intenté muchas veces, de hecho una amiga siempre me dice “cambiá tu forma de hablar, porque aquí no vas a entrar a trabajar en ningún lado”, y le digo “bueno, no sé, tendré que hacer el esfuerzo; primero dejame darme la cabeza contra la pared”. No lo puedo cambiar, o sea, es algo que me sale muy natural. Entonces, por el momento, no me sale cambiarlo.

(Carla)

It’s my way of speaking, and if I say “cashe” I‘m not going to say “calle”, as they say over there. No, no, I‘ve tried many times, in fact a friend always tells me “change the way you speak, because here you’re not going to get a job anywhere”, and I tell her “well, I don’t know, I‘ll have to make the effort; first let me bang my head against the wall”. I can’t change it, I mean, it’s something that comes very naturally to me. So, for the moment, I can’t change it.

(Carla)

Carla’s comments reveal the tension between an individual’s linguistic identity and the pressures to conform to the dominant language practices of the host society. Her refusal to modify her way of speaking, despite suggestions that this might impede her job prospects, reflects the significance of language as a marker of identity. In addition, this scenario raises questions about the responsibilities of the host society in fostering a linguistically inclusive environment, rather than placing the onus on migrants to assimilate linguistically. Vera’s and Carla’s discourses prompt us reconsider dominant language ideologies that prioritise uniformity over diversity.

While some resist changing their speech, others, like Rogelio below, employ strategic linguistic shifts to navigate social barriers. In Rogelio’s case, we see how he speaks Galician and adopts a Galician accent when looking to rent an apartment.

Hai uns meses, que estaba buscando piso e si… Igual foi casualidade. Fixen cinco chamadas a sitios diferentes falando no meu español mexicano normal, e a maioría, máis ben sempre, foi “ah, non, xa está alugado, non sei que”. “Ah, non sei que”, ata que á quinta ou sexta vez dixen “vou falar galego e vou tentar poñer acento galego, o máis galego que poida”.

(Rogelio)

A few months ago I was looking for a flat and yes…. It was pure chance. I made five calls to different places speaking my normal Mexican Spanish, and most of them, nearly always, were like “oh, no, it’s already rented, I don’t know what”. “Oh no…”, until the fifth or sixth time I said “I‘m going to speak Galician and I‘m going to try to put on a Galician accent, as much Galician as I can”.

(Rogelio)

Rogelio’s account demonstrates the strategic use of language as a means to navigate social barriers. His deliberate choice to adopt a Galician accent highlights how individuals may alter their linguistic identity in favour of one that affords better social opportunities.

The complexity of these adaptations is compounded when migrants engage with local Galician speakers. Participants struggled to access Galician due to the tendency of native Galicians to switch to speaking Spanish when interacting with people they identify as foreigners. Many participants tried initiating bilingual conversations, but this was seldom reciprocated.

Algunos preguntan si entiendo [gallego], porque muchas veces yo me quedo hablando [en castellano], respondo, y entonces es como… Primero “no sabíamos que hablabas en castellano” […] Entonces “sí, sí; entiendo pero no lo hablo, no voy a poder hablar pero entiendo”. Y después mucha gente ya ni eso, mucha gente ya cambia directamente al castellano. Pero en eso encontré mucha generosidad […] Porque todo el mundo hace el esfuerzo para no… Para hacerse entender, digamos.

(Sonia)

Some ask if I understand [Galician], I answer [in Spanish], and then it’s like… “we didn’t know you spoke in Spanish” […] Then I say “yes, yes; I understand Galician but I don’t speak it, I won’t be able to speak but I understand.” And then many people switch directly to Spanish. But in that I found a lot of generosity […] because everyone makes an effort to make themselves understood.

(Sonia)

Sonia’s experiences highlight how migrants’ engagement with the local language is influenced by both their own adaptations and the reactions of native speakers. The kindness she perceived in people switching to Spanish can be seen as a double-edged sword; it facilitates communication but also hinders the use of Galician. This interactional dynamic reflects broader language ideologies that privilege dominant languages, in this case Spanish, over minoritised ones.

The linguistic strategies employed by participants, as seen through Vera, Carla, and Rogelio’s experiences, offer an illustration of how standard language ideology and dominant language ideologies mediate individual linguistic choices within contexts of transgenerational return migration. Their linguistic adaptations underscore the tension between the ideological imposition of a standard language, which perpetuates linguistic hierarchies (Lippi-Green 1997; Dubois and Boudreau 2007) and participants’ efforts to navigate or resist these norms. Sonia’s interactions further reveal the complex negotiations return migrants undertake, as they align or contest their linguistic practices with the expectations of the host society.

4.2.3. Sociolinguistic Awareness and Preconceptions

Finally, concluding our analysis, we consider how the initial perceptions and growing awareness of Galicia’s sociolinguistic context shape the experiences of transgenerational return migrants. In our analysis of participants’ understanding of Galicia’s linguistic dynamics, we sought to determine how their preconceived notions corresponded to or diverged from the familial narratives about the region.

Many participants revealed that before coming to Galicia under the BEME programme, they had only a rudimentary understanding of the region’s sociolinguistic context. This initial awareness was broad and lacked the specific nuances of the sociolinguistic complexities unique to Galicia. To understand the impact of these preconceptions, we look at the narratives of participants like Sandra, who shared her initial expectations and subsequent realisations regarding the Galician language.

No, no, no sabía. No hice ningún curso. No sabía […] si yo iba a entrar en a comprar en un supermercado, si me iban a hablar en gallego o en castellano. Pero no lo pensé mucho, digamos […] porque al, mi abuela hablar, como te digo, mitad gallego mitad español, nunca me resultó difícil. […] Porque como lo entendía casi todo, yo pensaba que el gallego iba a ser incomprensible, pero bueno, no fue tan… Y además como yo sé algo de portugués […] muchas palabras ya las conocía por eso.

(Sandra)

No, no, I didn’t know. I didn’t do any course. I didn’t know […] if I was going to go shopping in a supermarket, if they were going to speak to me in Galician or in Spanish. But I didn’t give it much thought […] as my grandmother spoke, as I said, half Galician and half Spanish, it was never difficult for me […] I understood almost everything. I thought Galician would be incomprehensible, but well, it wasn’t so… And besides, as I know some Portuguese […] I already knew many words.

(Sandra)

Sandra’s pragmatic approach, influenced by her knowledge of related languages, exemplifies a utilitarian perspective where language serves as a functional tool. This could suggest that return migration for individuals with this view is less about seeking a cultural reintegration and more about exploring practical ways to navigate and connect with their heritage, perhaps with less emotional weight attached to the proficiency in the local language.

Participants consistently emphasised the link between their language and their identity in various contexts, whether in academic, professional, or daily interactions. For example, for individuals from Latin American countries, their accent and dialect often led Galicians to perceive them as a homogenous group, leading to general categorisations such as “non-peninsular Spanish-speakers” or “Latinos.” Beyond individual perceptions, the experiences of migrants like Mario reveal how language can index identity to others, often leading to broad categorisations and social discrimination.

Existe muchísimo la… como… saber que no es de aquí. “Ah, no, este no es de aquí”. Eso está muy claro […] que no es ningún tipo de prejuicio, pero sí se nota: “No es de aquí”, por primero de todo. Y luego después, “si no es de aquí, ¿de dónde viene? Latinoamérica, seguramente”. Y ahí sí que tienen mucha discriminación y mucho prejuicio, con los latinoamericanos.

(Mario)

There is an awful lot of the… like… knowing who is not from here. “Ah, no, he’s not from here”. That is very clear. […] which is not any kind of prejudice, but it is noticeable: “He’s not from here”, first of all. And then afterwards, “if he’s not from here, where does he come from? Latin America, surely”. And there is a lot of discrimination and prejudice against Latin Americans.

(Mario)

Mario’s account underscores the role of language as a marker of inclusion or exclusion. Similar to Vera and Carla’s accounts, the immediate classification of individuals as “other” based on their accent foregrounds a language ideology that conflates linguistic characteristics with geographical origin. Such societal practices reflect the power structures embedded within linguistic interactions, shaping the experiential realities of return migrants and perpetuating discriminatory biases.

Sandra’s and Mario’s experiences reveal the ways in which language ideologies mediate processes of social inclusion in contexts of transgenerational return migration. Moreover, they highlight the challenges that return migrants face in their ancestral lands, aligning with Kılınç’s (2022) observation that the journey back is not always straightforward and may involve navigating through unexpected sociolinguistic terrain. Their stories exemplify how language ideologies—specifically dominant language ideologies that serve powerful social groups—can significantly influence migrants’ interactions and integration within their ancestral communities (Martínez 2013; Jaffe 2008). Mario’s encounter with linguistic discrimination highlights the pervasive impact of these ideologies, which not only delineate in-group and out-group distinctions but also perpetuate social hierarchies and power relations (Jaffe 2008).

5. Conclusions

In this article, we have explored the interplay between language ideologies and the experiences of transgenerational return migrants in Galicia, Spain, through the lens of participants in the Scholarships for Outstanding Youth Abroad (BEME) programme. This analysis has brought into focus the complex sociolinguistic landscape these migrants navigate. Our findings reveal that language serves as a symbolic resource far beyond its communicative function. The emotional connections fostered by familial language transmission influence migrants’ perceptions of their cultural heritage and their decisions to engage in transgenerational return migration. These personal connections underpin the challenges faced in a linguistic context where speaking minoritised languages and dialectal variations can lead to experiences of otherness and social exclusion.

In light of the work of scholars such as Silverstein (1979), Woolard (1998), and Kroskrity (2010), we have seen how language ideologies are not merely abstract concepts but have real implications for people’s lives. These ideologies shape social identities and sustain social structures, offering a lens to understand the experiences of migrants who, despite speaking a globally dominant language like Spanish, at times face prejudice and exclusion due to their Latin American origins. This phenomenon reflects the complexity of language ideologies where even within the sphere of a dominant language, dialectal variations significantly influence social inclusion and the construction of identity.

Furthermore, this study highlights the pragmatic adaptations return migrants employ in response to these challenges, adjusting their linguistic practices in various social, academic, and professional contexts in Galicia. The strategic use of language, whether through code switching or dialect modification, reflects their agency in shaping their sociolinguistic environment and their identity. However, these adaptations also reflect and reinforce broader societal language ideologies that prioritise dominant languages and varieties, often at the expense of minoritised ones.

The evolving sociolinguistic awareness among return migrants, shaped by their experiences in Galicia, reveals the dynamic nature of language ideologies. Initially influenced by familial narratives, their perceptions undergo transformation through direct interaction with the Galician sociolinguistic context. This evolution in understanding highlights the complex, often contradictory, nature of transgenerational return migration, where cultural reconnection and identity negotiation are ongoing processes.

Thus, this study contributes to the discourse on migration studies by examining the role of language ideologies in shaping the experiences of transgenerational return migrants. It underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of language as both a tool of communication and a symbol of identity and belonging. The insights gained from this research have significant implications for policy and practice in multilingual migration contexts. They suggest a re-evaluation of language policies and educational strategies that can better accommodate and valorise the diverse linguistic realities of return migrants. As regions like Galicia continue to engage with the ongoing dynamics of global migration, acknowledging and addressing these sociolinguistic issues will be key to fostering inclusive communities.