Navigating Language, Faith, and Identity: A Case Study of Language Policies in Indian Transnational Families in Saudi Arabia

Abstract

This study investigates the family language policies (FLPs) of two North Indian Muslim families residing in Saudi Arabia, focusing on how they navigate multilingualism to balance cultural heritage, religious practices, and sociolinguistic adaptation. Using Spolsky’s FLP framework and a qualitative case study approach, the research examines the dynamic roles of Urdu, Arabic, and English in these households. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with mothers and children to explore language ideologies, practices, and management strategies. The findings reveal that Urdu serves as a cornerstone of cultural identity, while Arabic is pivotal for religious education and social integration. English plays a supplementary role as a tool for academic and professional aspirations. Despite shared goals, the families adopt distinct approaches: one emphasizes heritage preservation and liturgical Arabic, while the other integrates Arabic more comprehensively alongside Urdu. These insights contribute to FLP scholarship by highlighting the intersection of language, faith, and identity in transnational families in non-western context, offering practical implications for educators and policymakers working with multilingual communities.

1. Introduction

Family Language Policy (FLP) is an emerging field of study that examines the ideologies, practices, and management strategies families use to govern language acquisition and use within the home (King et al., 2008). As a multidisciplinary domain, FLP connects sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and anthropology to explore how internal family dynamics and external sociopolitical contexts shape language decisions. Spolsky’s (2004, 2012) FLP framework is widely used to analyze these dynamics, emphasizing the interplay of three core components: language ideologies (beliefs about language), language practices (actual use of language in daily life), and language management (interventions to influence language behavior). These components are particularly salient in transnational contexts, where families must navigate multilingual environments that demand balancing heritage preservation with social integration (Curdt-Christiansen & Sun, 2022).

Multilingual transnational families often face complex decisions about language use, particularly when residing in environments that emphasize different languages for cultural, educational, and religious purposes. For Indian Muslim families, these dynamics are magnified in Saudi Arabia, where the sociolinguistic landscape demands proficiency in Arabic while maintaining heritage languages like Hindi/Urdu. English, as a global lingua franca, further complicates these dynamics by serving as a medium for education and professional development. These families must therefore engage in deliberate FLP strategies to ensure their children acquire and maintain proficiency in all three languages.

Religion plays a central role in FLP among Muslim families. Arabic, as the language of the Qur’an, holds profound spiritual significance and serves as a critical medium for religious education, prayer, and community engagement (Revis, 2017). Also, religion was found to be among macro and micro factors that impact parental decision in FLP (Alasmari, 2023). Meanwhile, heritage languages like Urdu or Hindi often function as cultural anchors, preserving familial identity and intergenerational ties (Oppong, 2013). The interplay of these languages reflects broader tensions between faith, identity, and sociolinguistic adaptation, requiring families to adopt innovative strategies to balance these competing demands.

Despite the growing body of FLP research, few studies have explored how religion, cultural identity, and multilingualism intersect in the context of transnational Indian Muslim families. Existing research has largely focused on FLPs in Western or monolingual societies, leaving gaps in understanding how families navigate the unique challenges of balancing faith, heritage, and adaptation in a multilingual setting like Saudi Arabia (Ilma & Rohmah, 2024; Curdt-Christiansen, 2016). This study addresses this gap by investigating the FLPs of two North Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia, focusing on their strategies for balancing cultural preservation, religious obligations, and societal integration.

The research aims to answer the following questions:

• How do Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia navigate their family language policies, considering factors such as cultural heritage, religious practices, and the sociolinguistic environment?
• How do religious beliefs and practices influence the language policies and language choices of Indian Muslim families in their homes?

By examining these questions, this study contributes to the growing literature on FLP, offering insights into the dynamic ways transnational families manage language choices to sustain cultural and religious identities while adapting to their host country’s sociolinguistic environment.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Family Language Policy (FLP) and Its Frameworks

Family Language Policy (FLP) explores how families make decisions about language use within the household, balancing linguistic, cultural, and educational goals. It includes the ideologies, practices, and management strategies that shape language use among family members (King et al., 2008). Spolsky’s (2004, 2019) FLP framework has been widely adopted to analyze these dynamics, emphasizing three components: language ideologies (beliefs about language), language practices (everyday use of languages), and language management (active interventions to influence language behavior). This framework highlights how family-level linguistic decisions are shaped by both internal factors, such as parental goals and intergenerational communication, and external sociocultural contexts, including educational systems and societal norms (Curdt-Christiansen & Sun, 2022; Smith-Christmas, 2016).

FLP is particularly relevant in multilingual and transnational settings, where families must navigate complex linguistic landscapes that include heritage languages, societal languages, and additional languages of religion or global communication. Transnational families often face competing pressures to preserve their native languages while ensuring proficiency in languages that support social integration and professional success (Zhu & Li, 2016; Hirsch & Lee, 2018). These dynamics are amplified in religiously observant families, where liturgical languages like Arabic play a central role in identity and practice (Revis, 2017).

2.2. Role of Religion in Family Language Policy

Religion is a significant factor in shaping FLPs, particularly in families where faith is integral to identity. Religious practices often necessitate the acquisition and use of specific languages, such as Arabic for Qur’anic recitation among Muslim families. These linguistic demands influence family decisions about which languages to prioritize, how to teach them, and the contexts in which they are used (Revis, 2017). Oppong (2013) describes religion as a conduit for identity recognition, while Smolicz’s (1992) theory of core values suggests that languages tied to religious or ethnic identity are more likely to be preserved within families.

In Muslim households, Arabic occupies a dual role: as the sacred language of Islam, it is essential for religious rituals, and as a societal language in contexts like Saudi Arabia, it facilitates integration into the broader community. Studies have shown that Arabic is often prioritized for religious purposes, such as prayer and Qur’anic study, even when conversational proficiency remains limited (Ilma & Rohmah, 2024; Rohmah et al., 2024). For Indian Muslim families, Urdu often complements Arabic, functioning as a cultural and religious bridge due to its shared script and lexicon. This interplay of languages highlights the complex relationship between faith and language, where linguistic choices reflect broader spiritual and cultural values.

2.3. FLP in Multilingual and Transnational Contexts

Transnational families often navigate multilingual environments characterized by heritage language maintenance, societal language acquisition, and, in some cases, liturgical language learning. These dynamics create opportunities for translanguaging, code-switching, and other flexible linguistic practices that enable families to adapt to diverse contexts (Pavlenko, 2004; Smith-Christmas, 2014). In multilingual societies like India, where language is closely tied to identity and cultural expression, the preservation of native languages is seen as critical for maintaining familial and community ties (Curdt-Christiansen, 2016). However, migration to predominantly Arabic-speaking countries like Saudi Arabia introduces new linguistic demands, requiring families to integrate Arabic for social and religious purposes while retaining their native languages for cultural continuity (Hasanah et al., 2022).

Research by Hirsch and Lee (2018) emphasizes that FLP decisions are shaped by both family dynamics and broader sociolinguistic environments. Schools, religious institutions, and community networks play a significant role in influencing language use among transnational families. For instance, Bezcioglu-Göktolga and Yagmur (2018) found that the language policies of schools often encourage the use of societal languages, potentially impacting the transmission of heritage languages at home. In the context of Saudi Arabia, where Arabic dominates educational and social domains, families must navigate its integration while safeguarding their heritage languages, often employing innovative strategies such as informal lessons and media consumption (Revis, 2017).

2.4. Challenges and Opportunities in FLP

Implementing effective FLPs in transnational families involves navigating tensions between heritage preservation and sociolinguistic adaptation. For Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia, these tensions manifest in the need to maintain Urdu or Hindi for cultural identity, acquire English for education and global mobility, and integrate Arabic for religious and societal purposes. The hierarchical prioritization of these languages reflects both familial goals and societal pressures (Zhu & Li, 2016). Kheirkhah and Cekaite (2015) highlight the importance of social interaction in maintaining heritage languages, while Pavlenko (2004) underscores the role of family narratives and traditions in fostering linguistic continuity.

Despite these challenges, transnational families demonstrate resilience and adaptability in managing their multilingual environments. Strategies such as translanguaging, the use of digital resources, and participation in community activities enable families to address competing linguistic demands while preserving their unique identities (Curdt-Christiansen & Sun, 2022). These practices reflect the fluid and dynamic nature of FLPs, where language choices are continuously negotiated in response to changing social and cultural contexts.

Overall, the literature on FLPs highlights the intricate relationship between language, identity, and sociocultural context in transnational families. For Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia, FLPs are influenced by the interplay of heritage preservation, religious obligations, and sociolinguistic adaptation. While the challenges of multilingualism are significant, these families’ strategies reveal their resourcefulness in balancing competing demands. This study builds on these insights, exploring how two Indian Muslim families navigate their FLPs to sustain cultural and religious identities while integrating into their host country’s linguistic environment.

3. Methodology

This study employed a qualitative case study design to explore the family language policies of two North Indian Muslim families residing in Saudi Arabia. This approach allowed for an in-depth examination of the dynamic interplay between language practices, cultural preservation, religious obligations, and sociolinguistic adaptation in a transnational context. The case study design was particularly suited to uncovering the nuanced strategies these families use to manage their multilingual environments, without seeking to generalize findings to a broader population.

3.1. Participants and Sampling

Participants were selected through purposive sampling to ensure they met specific inclusion criteria. Each family was required to have at least one child aged 4–10 years and to demonstrate active engagement with multiple languages, including Hindi/Urdu, Arabic, and English. These languages were chosen due to their significance in the families’ cultural, educational, and religious contexts. As the mothers in both families were observed to be more involved in the language learning of their children, and in order to ensure diverse perspectives, the study focused on the mother, as the primary caregiver, and one child from each family. The present study prioritizes depth over breadth, so only one parent’s perspective has been taken into consideration, which is the specific limitation of this research. The findings are not intended to be statistically generalizable; rather, we argue for analytical transferability, whereby the detailed descriptions of context, participants, and processes enable readers to assess the applicability of findings to other settings. The families were given pseudonyms, “The Khan Family” and “The Ali Family,” to protect their privacy.

The families selected for study share similar socio-economic status (SES). Both families own private homes in India while residing in a rented two-bedroom apartment in Saudi Arabia. The mothers are the bread earners in both families. The mother in the Khan family holds a doctorate with fourteen years of experience in the education sector in India and is a recent immigrant to Saudi Arabia, whereas the mother in the Ali family holds a master’s degree with thirteen years’ experience in the education sector in Saudi Arabia. The Khan family lives in a neighborhood surrounded by Saudi families and have more interaction with Arabic speakers than Indians. The Ali family’s social circle comprises Indian families. All families visiting the Ali family are Hindi/Urdu speakers.

The Khan family exemplifies a household that prioritizes cultural preservation and employs pragmatic strategies for integrating Arabic, primarily for religious purposes. In contrast, the Ali family adopts a more immersive approach, blending Arabic with Urdu in daily life to enhance both social and religious connections. This focused selection enabled a detailed comparison of their distinct approaches to navigating FLPs in Saudi Arabia.

3.2. Data Collection

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, which provided flexibility to probe participants’ language ideologies, practices, and management strategies in depth. Separate sets of questions were developed for mothers and children to capture their unique perspectives on family language policies. The interview questions were informed by Spolsky’s (2004, 2019) FLP framework and key studies on multilingualism and religious language practices (Curdt-Christiansen, 2016; Revis, 2017). A pilot study was conducted to refine the clarity and relevance of the questions based on participant feedback.

Interviews were conducted in Urdu and Hindi, the participants’ native languages, to ensure comfort and depth of responses. Each session lasted approximately 40–50 min and was audio-recorded with the participants’ consent. Transcripts were subsequently generated for analysis. To minimize bias and ensure cultural sensitivity, both researchers collaborated in designing the interview protocol and analyzing the data. The study used both interviews and observations to study the language policy in the selected families.

3.3. Data Analysis

The transcribed interviews were analyzed thematically using an open coding approach to identify recurring patterns and themes. Initial coding focused on language use in daily life, the role of religious practices, cultural identity preservation, and sociolinguistic adaptation. Axial coding was then employed to explore relationships between themes, such as how religious beliefs influenced language choices or how societal pressures shaped language management strategies. This iterative process allowed for the development of a structured understanding of the families’ FLPs.

To enhance reliability, the coding process involved independent analyses by both researchers, followed by collaborative discussions to resolve discrepancies. Member checking was conducted by sharing preliminary findings with participants to ensure the accuracy of interpretations. Additionally, the data were presented using identifiers (e.g., M for mother, C for child, KF for the Khan Family, and AF for the Ali Family) to provide context and traceability.

3.4. Ethical Considerations

Ethical guidelines were strictly followed to protect participant confidentiality and ensure informed consent. Participants were briefed on the study’s objectives, procedures, and their right to withdraw at any stage. Pseudonyms were used in all documentation, and sensitive information was anonymized to safeguard privacy.

The qualitative case study approach, combined with thematic analysis, provided a robust framework for understanding the FLPs of Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia. This methodology allowed for a rich exploration of the intersection between language, culture, and religion, shedding light on the strategies families use to navigate their complex linguistic environments.

4. Results

This qualitative analysis explores how Indian transnational families in Saudi Arabia navigate family language policies (FLPs) within the domains of home and community. The sociolinguistic context examined here differs markedly from settings typically studied in FLP research: Arabic functions simultaneously as the sacred language of Islam and the dominant societal language of the host country, creating a convergence between liturgical and societal linguistic demands rarely observed in Western contexts. Drawing from Spolsky’s (2019) FLP framework, this study examines the language practices, beliefs, and management strategies employed by two families as they balance cultural heritage, religious obligations, and sociolinguistic adaptation.

Building on prior research in FLPs, this study adopts the qualitative case study approach and thematic analysis methodology used by Ilma and Rohmah (2024) to investigate similar dynamics in Indonesian Muslim families. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand the intricacies of language ideologies and practices. Along with interviews, observation was also used as a medium to assess the families’ language policies. To ensure anonymity and clarity, pseudonyms have been assigned to the families: the Khan family and the Ali family. By examining the experiences of these families, the findings illuminate how FLPs contribute to cultural preservation, religious identity formation, and multilingual adaptation. Each family is analyzed individually to capture their unique strategies and challenges.

4.1. The Khan Family

The Khan family, an Indian Muslim household residing in Saudi Arabia, exemplifies the complexities of navigating multilingualism within a transnational context. The family comprises parents and their 4.5-year-old son, whose linguistic environment is shaped by a blend of cultural preservation, religious obligations, and sociolinguistic adaptation. The mother plays a pivotal role in shaping the family’s language policies, employing strategic practices to balance these competing linguistic demands.

4.2. Cultural Identity

The Khan family’s cultural identity is deeply tied to Urdu, particularly the dialect synonymous with the sophistication of the culture of their city Lucknow, known as “Lucknowi Urdu,” which emphasizes politeness, refinement, and cultural etiquette. The mother actively transmits this heritage to her son, ensuring that linguistic nuances from her hometown are preserved:

“I make it a point that he uses the dialect of my hometown (Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India) that is more sophisticated… For instance, in my city, we use ‘aap’ (polite form of referring to ‘you’); for the same in other cities, people use ‘tum’ or ‘tu’ (you).”

This intentional focus on teaching dialectal variations emphasizes the importance of language as a vehicle for cultural preservation. The mother views Urdu as a symbol of their heritage and a means of learning Arabic due to its shared script and loan words.

The family’s commitment to Urdu reflects broader patterns observed in transnational families, where the native language often serves as a medium for maintaining cultural identity and familial connections. Research suggests that heritage languages are critical for fostering a sense of belonging and intergenerational continuity, particularly in multilingual societies (Curdt-Christiansen, 2013; Wright, 2024).

4.3. Religious Practices and Arabic

For the Khan family, Arabic is central to religious practices, serving as the language of Qur’anic recitation and prayer. The mother introduces Arabic through structured teaching methods, starting with the alphabet to build the child’s scriptural literacy:

“I am teaching my son Arabic alphabet at present. Slowly, I’ll move forward with the lessons so that he learns to read the Qur’an.”

While Arabic is prioritized for its liturgical importance, conversational fluency is not a primary focus. The family recognizes that most Indian-origin Muslims lack the ability to speak or understand Arabic unless immersed in an Arabic-speaking environment:

“In India people learn the Arabic language only to read the Qur’an. There is no focus on understanding the language, so Indian Muslims only know how to read and write Arabic with no knowledge of speaking or listening.”

To bridge this gap between productive and receptive skills in Arabic, the Khan family uses Urdu as a complementary language for religious education, given its shared script and vocabulary with Arabic:

“Urdu language is given more prominence at home as that is similar to Arabic in certain aspects like the script and some commonality in words. As it is important to learn the language of the place where one resides, efforts are made at home to help my son learn both languages so that it becomes easier for him to be incorporated in both the communities (India & Saudi Arabia).”

This pragmatic approach ensures that the child develops the necessary skills to engage with religious texts while preserving their cultural linguistic heritage.

The family’s use of Arabic aligns with findings from Ilma and Rohmah (2024), who highlight the centrality of Arabic in Muslim families. However, the Khan family’s situation differs from Muslim families in non-Arabic-speaking countries: residing in Saudi Arabia means that Arabic serves not only liturgical purposes but also facilitates societal integration, creating a convergence between religious and practical motivations for language learning. The integration of Urdu as a supportive tool further underscores the Khan family’s adaptability, as they leverage linguistic similarities to facilitate religious education.

4.4. Language Practices

The Khan family adopts a multilingual approach to navigate their linguistic environment. Urdu and Hindi dominate household communication, fostering cultural continuity, while English is introduced to prepare the child for educational and social contexts. The mother explains this balance:

“I give prominence to both my native language and English at home when my son is around as he’s 4.5 years old and is in a stage of grasping the languages spoken around him. As English is the second language in India, it is important for him to be fluent in English too.”

Arabic phrases are gradually incorporated into daily conversations to familiarize the child with the language. The child’s ability to adapt linguistically is evident in his interactions with Arabic-speaking peers, where he uses Arabic terms to communicate:

“I have seen him trying to make other kids (Arab) understand what he wants to say by using words like ‘haada,’ ‘koes,’ ‘sayyara,’ ‘khalaas,’ etc.”

This multilingual strategy reflects the family’s resourcefulness in addressing various communicative needs. By integrating multiple languages, the Khan family prepares their child for a multicultural environment while preserving their cultural and religious identities. The child’s emerging bilingualism demonstrates the success of this approach in fostering linguistic adaptability.

4.5. Sociolinguistic Adaptation

Living in Saudi Arabia necessitates sociolinguistic adaptation for the Khan family, particularly in acquiring basic Arabic for daily interactions. The mother and father actively learn Arabic phrases from their surroundings and share them with their son to enhance his ability to communicate in public spaces:

“The words and expressions that I and my husband pick from our surroundings, we share with each other and make sure our son gets to know those words and is able to use them.”

The child intuitively distinguishes between Arabic- and Urdu-speaking individuals, adjusting his language use accordingly. This ability to navigate linguistic boundaries highlights his growing sociolinguistic awareness:

“It is interesting to note that he somehow distinguishes between an Arabic speaker and a Hindi/Urdu speaker without me telling him so. Not only this, he switches between Hindi/Urdu and Arabic (whatever little amount of Arabic he knows) depending on the language spoken by the person in front of him.”

The family’s proactive approach to learning and integrating Arabic reflects their adaptability and resilience in a multilingual environment. The child’s sociolinguistic competence underscores the effectiveness of their strategies, as he successfully navigates complex linguistic and cultural contexts.

Overall, the Khan family’s linguistic practices exemplify the dynamic interplay between cultural identity, religious practices, and sociolinguistic adaptation. Urdu helps in preserving their heritage, while Arabic facilitates integration into their local environment. English and Hindi are employed strategically to meet educational and social needs. This analysis highlights the family’s resourceful navigation of multilingualism, ensuring that their child is equipped to thrive in a complex sociolinguistic landscape while maintaining a strong connection to their roots.

4.6. The Ali Family

The Ali family, an Indian Muslim household residing in Saudi Arabia, offers a distinct perspective on the challenges and strategies of navigating family language policies (FLPs) in a multilingual environment. Unlike the Khan family, the Ali family integrates Arabic more prominently into their daily lives, reflecting their stronger emphasis on religious practices and sociolinguistic adaptation. Urdu remains the dominant language of home communication, while Arabic and English are employed for religious, social, and educational purposes. The family’s language practices highlight their commitment to balancing cultural preservation with local adaptation.

4.7. Cultural Identity

The Ali family’s cultural identity is firmly anchored in Urdu, which serves as the primary language for familial interactions and social engagement. The family uses Urdu not only for everyday communication but also as a medium for consuming cultural media, such as Indian movies and news:

“We talk in our mother tongue, watch Indian movies, and [watch] news. We find it interesting and convenient to watch television in Urdu. In any other language, we have to focus on the subtitles, which makes it less entertaining.”

Urdu’s central role in the family’s linguistic repertoire reinforces their connection to their Indian heritage. Unlike the Khan family, who emphasize dialectal nuances, the Ali family focuses on maintaining general fluency in Urdu, ensuring that the language remains a key element of their identity. The importance of Urdu extends to connecting with extended family members in India, many of whom do not speak Arabic or English.

Urdu functions as a cultural bridge, linking the family to their heritage and enabling intergenerational connections. This aligns with findings from Curdt-Christiansen and Sun (2022), who emphasize the role of heritage languages in preserving cultural identity within transnational families.

4.8. Religious Practices and Arabic

Arabic plays a central role in the Ali family’s religious practices, particularly for Qur’anic recitation and prayer. The family integrates Arabic into their religious routines through structured activities, such as reading the Qur’an in Arabic alongside Urdu translations:

“We read Qur’an in Arabic as well as translations. By doing so, we are able to understand the meaning of the written script.”

In addition to regular Qur’anic recitation, the family engages in religious activities like Umrah (religious pilgrimage) and Ziyarah (visiting pious sites), which provide immersive opportunities to deepen their child’s connection to Arabic:

“We make sure that we go for Umrah and do lots of Ziyarrah to give religious education. We make it a point to go for Umrah twice a year and visit Madina also.”

The mother views these practices as essential for instilling religious values and enhancing the children’s familiarity with Arabic. Unlike the Khan family, the Ali family emphasizes the integration of Arabic into both spiritual and practical domains.

The Ali family’s approach highlights their commitment to leveraging Arabic as both a liturgical and cultural tool. By incorporating translations and immersive religious experiences, they create a holistic framework for religious education. This aligns with Ilma and Rohmah’s (2024) findings on the importance of Arabic in fostering religious identity within Muslim families. Significantly, the Ali family’s context in Saudi Arabia allows Arabic to fulfill both sacred and societal functions simultaneously, a configuration that differs from Muslim families in Western or non-Arabic-speaking contexts where these domains remain separate.

4.9. Language Practices

The Ali family adopts a multilingual approach, with Urdu dominating household interactions and Arabic and English playing complementary roles. The mother incorporates basic Arabic phrases into daily conversations to familiarize the child with the language:

“We try to use small Arabic words at home, which helps him to communicate outside. It will be easy for him to connect with other kids at school and interact with the kids in parks when we go out in the evenings if he is able to communicate in Arabic.”

The child, who attends an Arabic-medium school, has developed a clear understanding of linguistic boundaries. He distinguishes between Urdu as the family language and Arabic as the school language, adapting his language use based on context:

“My son goes to Arabic school and clearly distinguishes that Arabic is my school language and Urdu is my mother language.”

English is introduced selectively for educational purposes, ensuring that the child is prepared for academic and professional opportunities:

“My son is learning English alphabet at school. We try to teach him English at home too by revising the English letters taught in the class.”

The Ali family’s multilingual practices reflect their adaptability in addressing diverse linguistic needs. By embedding Arabic into daily conversations and educational settings, they prepare their children for integration into the local environment while maintaining their cultural and religious identities.

4.10. Sociolinguistic Adaptation

Living in Saudi Arabia necessitates significant sociolinguistic adaptation for the Ali family. The family incorporates Arabic into their daily lives to facilitate interactions in public spaces, such as schools, markets, and community gatherings. The child demonstrates his ability to navigate linguistic challenges by using mixed language and gestures to communicate with Arabic-speaking peers. He finds it challenging to make himself understood by Arabic-speaking children, but finds it fun to make other kids understand what he wishes to say:

“I try to talk with mix language and sometimes by showing some actions.”

The mother actively supports this adaptation by creating opportunities for the children to practice Arabic in meaningful contexts, ensuring that they feel comfortable and confident in the local environment.

The family’s proactive approach to sociolinguistic adaptation highlights their commitment to integrating into Saudi Arabian society. The child’s ability to switch between languages and contexts underscores the success of these efforts, reflecting a balance between cultural preservation and practical engagement with the sociolinguistic landscape.

To sum up, the Ali family exemplifies a pragmatic approach to family language policy, balancing their cultural, religious, and sociolinguistic needs. Urdu serves as the foundation of their identity, while Arabic is seamlessly integrated into religious practices and daily interactions. English is employed strategically for education, ensuring that the children are equipped for future opportunities. The family’s emphasis on immersive experiences and contextual language use underscores their adaptability and resilience in navigating a multilingual environment. Their practices align with broader trends in transnational families, where language policies are shaped by a dynamic interplay of faith, heritage, and sociolinguistic demands.

5. Discussion

The linguistic practices of the Khan and Ali families illustrate the intricate processes through which Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia navigate family language policies in a multilingual and multicultural setting. Importantly, the sociolinguistic configuration these families navigate differs fundamentally from contexts typically examined in Western FLP scholarship. In most Western studies, heritage languages compete with dominant societal languages, and liturgical languages (where relevant) occupy a separate, often marginal domain. In contrast, for these Muslim families in Saudi Arabia, Arabic serves simultaneously as the sacred language of their faith and the dominant societal language of their host country. This convergence produces FLP dynamics that challenge conventional frameworks and warrant close examination. Despite shared goals of preserving cultural heritage, fulfilling religious obligations, and adapting to their sociolinguistic environment, each family employs distinct strategies shaped by their specific priorities and circumstances. These strategies provide valuable insights into the dynamic relationship between language, identity, and environment, while also revealing limitations in existing theoretical frameworks developed primarily in Western, secular contexts. The different strategies that the multilingual families residing in Saudi Arabia use in order to strike a balance between all languages that they wish their children to acquire range from formal/informal teaching, manner and methods of communication, roles of parents, schooling, ideologies, and choices of language varieties (Protassova, 2018).

For both families, Urdu functions as a vital marker of cultural identity. In the Khan family, the mother emphasizes preserving the nuances of “Lucknowi dialect”, a refined dialect of Urdu, replicative of the city’s tehzeeb (elegance). Her deliberate teaching of traditional forms, such as polite pronouns and formal expressions, reflects a commitment to transmitting cultural values to her child. She views Urdu not merely as a medium of communication but as a repository of sophistication and regional pride. In contrast, the Ali family takes a broader approach to maintaining Urdu, focusing on fluency and its practical use in everyday communication. The family reinforces their connection to their Indian heritage through cultural media, such as Indian movies and news, rather than emphasizing dialectal subtleties. Kaveh (2018) proclaims that in order to maintain heritage language, activities such as watching TV, reading books, traveling to parents’ home countries, inviting grandparents, etc., were encouraged in bi-/multilingual families. While the Khan family’s approach reflects a desire to uphold regional linguistic distinctiveness, the Ali family’s strategy is grounded in ensuring accessibility and intergenerational connection.

The differences in their approaches to Urdu demonstrate how one’s identity can be preserved through varying methods, depending on family priorities and contexts. The Khan family’s emphasis on refinement and tradition aligns with studies that highlight the role of heritage languages in maintaining cultural identity and pride (Curdt-Christiansen, 2013). Meanwhile, the Ali family’s reliance on media as a cultural resource reflects the practicality of using accessible tools to sustain linguistic continuity in transnational settings.

Arabic holds a pivotal role in the religious lives of both families, though the extent and manner of its integration differ. Crucially, the position of Arabic in this context cannot be adequately characterized using categories developed in Western FLP research. Arabic is neither simply a “heritage language” (the families’ heritage language is Urdu), nor merely a “societal language” (though it dominates public domains in Saudi Arabia), nor a “foreign language” learned for instrumental purposes. Rather, it occupies a distinctive position as a sacred language with profound spiritual significance that simultaneously serves as the dominant language of the host society. This dual status shapes FLP decisions in ways that diverge from patterns documented in Western contexts, where liturgical and societal languages typically occupy separate domains. In the Khan family, Arabic is introduced primarily as a liturgical language, with the mother teaching her son the alphabet to enable Qur’anic recitation. While conversational fluency is not prioritized, Urdu serves as a supportive tool for religious education due to its structural and lexical similarities to Arabic. This pragmatic approach allows the family to fulfill their religious obligations while maintaining a strong connection to their linguistic heritage. By contrast, the Ali family adopts a more immersive approach, combining Qur’anic recitation in Arabic with Urdu translations to enhance comprehension. Their engagement in religious activities such as Umrah and Ziyarah further integrates Arabic into their daily lives, fostering a deeper connection to both the language and their faith. Hemming and Madge (2011) assert that one’s religious identity is formed by the way a person believes in and experiences one’s beliefs, the number of times a person attends the place of worship, and how one labels oneself.

Through these language management strategies, both families engage in what Basch et al. (1994) describe as transnational processes that link their societies of origin and settlement. Their FLPs function not merely as practical communication tools but as identity-constructive practices that maintain simultaneous belonging to multiple national and cultural spaces. The families’ persistence in heritage language maintenance despite the dominance of Arabic in their host environment demonstrates what may be termed linguistic resilience, the capacity to sustain multilingual repertoires under conditions of potential language shift (Curdt-Christiansen & Sun, 2022).

The Ali family’s emphasis on Arabic reflects a broader application of the language beyond its liturgical function. By creating opportunities for immersive learning, they position Arabic not only as the language of faith but also as a cultural bridge to their host country. This approach aligns with findings from Ilma and Rohmah (2024), which underscore the significance of Arabic in fostering religious identity in Muslim families. While the Khan family’s segmented use of Arabic reflects a more traditional approach to religious education, the Ali family’s integrative strategy demonstrates how families can adapt language practices to their sociolinguistic environment.

Both families exhibit multilingual practices that balance their cultural, educational, and religious needs. In the Khan family, Urdu and Hindi dominate household communication, fostering cultural continuity, while English is strategically introduced to prepare the child for academic and social contexts. Arabic phrases are gradually incorporated into daily conversations to familiarize the child with the language, reflecting a pragmatic approach to language acquisition. The child’s ability to use Arabic terms in interactions with peers demonstrates his growing bilingual competence and adaptability.

Similarly, the Ali family employs a multilingual approach, with Urdu as the dominant language and Arabic and English playing complementary roles. The child’s attendance at an Arabic-medium school further enhances his proficiency, enabling him to distinguish between Urdu as the family language and Arabic as the language of education and public interaction. The mother’s incorporation of Arabic words into daily conversations prepares the child for sociolinguistic engagement, while English is selectively introduced for educational purposes. The integration of multiple languages in both families highlights their adaptability and resourcefulness in navigating complex linguistic environments. Their practices reflect Spolsky’s (2019) FLP framework, which emphasizes the interplay between language practices, beliefs, and management strategies.

Sociolinguistic adaptation is a key theme in both families’ language policies. Living in Saudi Arabia requires the integration of Arabic into daily life to facilitate interactions in public spaces, such as schools, markets, and community settings. The Khan family approaches this challenge by actively learning and sharing Arabic phrases among family members, enabling their child to navigate social interactions with Arabic-speaking peers. The child’s ability to differentiate between Arabic and Urdu speakers without explicit guidance reflects his intuitive understanding of linguistic boundaries and cultural contexts.

The Ali family takes a more immersive approach to sociolinguistic adaptation, leveraging their child’s attendance at an Arabic-medium school to foster linguistic and social integration. The child’s use of mixed language and gestures in interactions with Arabic-speaking peers highlights his resilience and adaptability in a multilingual environment. This proactive engagement aligns with research emphasizing the role of environmental factors in shaping FLPs and fostering linguistic flexibility (Curdt-Christiansen & Sun, 2022). Both families’ efforts to adapt linguistically to their environment demonstrate their commitment to balancing cultural preservation with practical engagement in their host country.

Despite their shared goals, the Khan and Ali families exhibit distinct strategies in navigating their FLPs. The Khan family prioritizes the preservation of cultural and linguistic nuances, focusing on Urdu as a symbol of heritage and introducing Arabic primarily for religious purposes. Their integration of English reflects a forward-looking approach to education and global interaction. In contrast, the Ali family takes a more integrative approach, emphasizing the practical and immersive use of Arabic alongside Urdu to facilitate both religious education and social adaptation. Their use of English remains secondary, reflecting their greater focus on Arabic as a tool for navigating their sociolinguistic environment. Through these strategies, the families try to adopt a process that links their societies of origin and settlement (Basch et al., 1994). Notably, the diversity of these strategies suggests that the binary opposition between “heritage language maintenance” and “societal language acquisition,” which structures much Western FLP scholarship, may be inadequate for contexts where religious observance aligns with host country linguistic norms. Both families maintain Urdu while simultaneously embracing Arabic, not as competing priorities but as complementary dimensions of a coherent multilingual identity rooted in faith, culture, and practical adaptation.

Notably, the children in both families did not display resistance or negotiation regarding language use. Both children approached multilingual communication with apparent enjoyment, employing code-mixing and gestures when interacting with Arabic-speaking peers. The Khan child demonstrated intuitive code-switching between Arabic and Urdu depending on his interlocutor, while the Ali child resourcefully combined mixed language with gestures. The consistency between home and community language values in these families, coupled with the playful framing of language learning, may contribute to this cooperative orientation toward multilingualism.

While Spolsky’s (2004, 2019) tripartite framework (language ideologies, practices, and management) provides a useful heuristic for organizing this analysis, its application to the present context reveals certain limitations. The framework was developed primarily in Western, secular contexts and may not fully account for the unique role of sacred languages in religiously observant communities. Arabic, for these Muslim families, occupies a distinctive position that is neither purely a heritage language, nor a societal language, nor a language of education in the traditional sense. Rather, it functions as a liturgical language with profound spiritual significance that transcends instrumental communicative purposes. Furthermore, the framework’s emphasis on the home as the primary site of FLP may underestimate the influence of religious institutions, community networks, and transnational connections that shape language decisions in diasporic Muslim families. Future research should develop more culturally responsive FLP frameworks that incorporate the concept of sacred language as a distinct category and attend to the multiple scales (family, community, transnational) at which FLP operates.

Finally, the linguistic practices of the Khan and Ali families highlight the dynamic interplay between cultural identity, religious practices, and sociolinguistic adaptation in shaping FLPs within transnational contexts. Both families demonstrate resourcefulness and resilience, leveraging their linguistic repertoires to balance heritage preservation with integration into their local environment. These findings contribute to the growing body of research on FLPs by illustrating the diverse strategies employed by Indian Muslim families in Saudi Arabia to navigate their multilingual realities. Future research could expand on these insights by exploring larger samples or examining the long-term effects of these practices on children’s linguistic and cultural identities.

6. Conclusions

This study examined the family language policies (FLPs) of two North Indian Muslim families residing in Saudi Arabia, revealing dynamics that challenge assumptions embedded in Western-centric FLP scholarship. Unlike contexts where heritage languages compete primarily with dominant societal languages, these families navigate a trilingual ecology in which Arabic functions simultaneously as a sacred liturgical language and the dominant societal language of their host country. This dual status of Arabic, combined with the families’ commitment to Urdu as a heritage language and English as a language of educational advancement, produces FLP configurations that cannot be adequately captured by frameworks developed in secular, Western settings. The findings demonstrate that Urdu serves as a vital link to cultural heritage, reinforcing familial and intergenerational ties, while Arabic occupies a distinctive position that transcends the conventional categories of “heritage,” “societal,” or “additional” language.

The contrasting approaches of the Khan and Ali families illuminate how FLPs in this context diverge from patterns documented in Western studies. The Khan family’s segmented approach, reserving Arabic primarily for liturgical functions while emphasizing refined Urdu practices, and the Ali family’s integrative strategy, blending Arabic into daily interactions alongside Urdu, represent distinct responses to a sociolinguistic environment where religious and societal language demands converge rather than compete. These patterns suggest that the opposition between heritage language maintenance and societal language acquisition, a central tension in much FLP literature, may be less applicable in contexts where religious observance aligns with host country linguistic norms. The diversity of strategies these families employ reflects not merely individual family priorities but also the fundamentally different structure of linguistic demands facing Muslim transnational families in Arabic-speaking societies.

While this study employed Spolsky’s FLP framework as an organizing heuristic, the findings reveal its limitations when applied beyond Western, secular contexts. The framework’s tripartite structure of ideologies, practices, and management does not readily accommodate the category of sacred language, which for these Muslim families carries spiritual significance that exceeds instrumental communicative value. Moreover, the framework’s emphasis on the home as the primary site of FLP underestimates the role of religious institutions, transnational community networks, and pilgrimage practices in shaping language decisions. This study therefore calls for the development of culturally responsive FLP frameworks that recognize sacred language as a distinct analytical category and attend to the multiple scales, including family, religious community, and transnational networks, at which FLP operates in observant communities.

The findings carry implications for educators and policymakers, though these must be understood within the study’s specific context. Educators working with children from religiously observant transnational families should recognize that heritage languages and liturgical languages may serve complementary rather than competing functions, and that families often possess sophisticated strategies for managing trilingual repertoires. Policymakers in both sending and receiving countries should consider how religious institutions can serve as partners in supporting language maintenance, given the integral connection between faith practices and language learning in these communities. More broadly, practitioners should avoid applying assumptions derived from Western secular contexts to families whose linguistic ecologies are structured by different cultural and religious logics.

This study opens several avenues for future research. Scholars should investigate FLPs in other religiously observant transnational communities, including Hindu, Sikh, and Buddhist families, to determine whether the patterns observed here reflect dynamics specific to Muslim families or broader phenomena associated with sacred language maintenance. Comparative studies across Arabic-speaking host countries and non-Arabic-speaking Muslim-majority countries could clarify the role of convergence between liturgical and societal languages in shaping FLP. Methodologically, future research should incorporate fathers’ perspectives to examine potential areas of agreement and disagreement between parents, and longitudinal designs could track how children’s language attitudes and practices evolve as they mature. Most critically, the field requires theoretical frameworks that move beyond Western-centric assumptions to accommodate the distinctive role of sacred languages, the influence of religious institutions, and the transnational networks that shape FLP in observant communities worldwide. By initiating this conversation, the present study aims to contribute not merely another case study to the FLP literature but a call for reconceptualizing the field’s foundational assumptions.