Next Article in Journal
Coming in to Whānau: Takatāpui and Irahuhua Relationships and Decolonisation
Previous Article in Journal
The Fate and Struggles of the Mexican Americans in the Age of Trump
Previous Article in Special Issue
Genealogy-as-Pedagogy for Afro-Descendant Communities in Costa Rica, Panama, and Belize
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Genealogy
Volume 10
Issue 2
10.3390/genealogy10020072
genealogy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Strategies for Heritage Language Maintenance: Mitigating Language Attrition Among Anaañ—English Bilinguals of Southern Nigeria

by
Victoria Enefiok Etim
* and
Jude Terkaa Tyoh
Department of Linguistics and Nigerian Languages, University of Calabar, Calabar PMB 1115, Nigeria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Genealogy 2026, 10(2), 72; https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy10020072
Submission received: 3 April 2026 / Revised: 14 May 2026 / Accepted: 17 June 2026 / Published: 19 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Language, Education, and Genealogy: Heritage Language Maintenance in Families, Communities, and Schools)
Versions Notes

Abstract

Language embodies traditions, values, and collective identity, bridging gaps between generations and geographies. Maintaining consistent language policies at home and in communities remains challenging, with research showing that only a few families have explicit rules about language use and few enforce them regularly. The study explores strategies for heritage language maintenance (HLM) to mitigate language attrition among Anaañ bilinguals residing in the Akpabuyo and Calabar South Local Government Areas of Cross River State, Nigeria. The study draws on social identity theory, which links language use to identity, motivation, and group affiliation, thereby influencing language maintenance. Using a qualitative approach, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 40 participants, selected purposively from Anaañ speakers in the study areas. Thematic analysis is employed to identify patterns and themes, revealing approaches for heritage language maintenance to curb language attrition. Findings reveal that despite some Anaañ speakers’ negative attitude towards their HL, others value it, keep it alive, and are ready to pass it to the future generations. This will preserve cultural identity and foster a sense of pride, belonging and shared values among Anaañ people, especially those residing in Southern Cross River State.

1. Introduction

Language is a carrier of tradition, values, and shared identity that connects people across time and space. Language is an important tool for social interaction, and the ability to produce natural language is unique to human beings (Duke et al. 2024; Etim and Okon 2023). As a result, language preservation’s importance is gaining traction in academic and activist circles (Hakim qizi 2025). Annet (2024) adds that preserving indigenous languages means safeguarding complex thought systems, world views, and the carriers of environments, histories, literature, ethics, and geographies. Heritage language maintenance (HLM) refers to the sustained use and passing on of ancestral languages within migrant communities despite sociolinguistic pressure from dominant languages (Diskin 2020). HLM plays an important role in preserving indigenous language, cultural identity and bridging generational connections (Polinsky and Scontras 2020). HLM represents the resilience of families and individuals who make efforts to preserve their linguistic and cultural heritage amid dominant-language influence (Fisherman 2001; Halsted 2015; Inan and Harris 2025).
For migrant populations, maintaining heritage languages within a sociolinguistic environment is key to preserving cultural ties and fostering community solidarity and resilience (Mathuswamy 2023). Heritage language maintenance is essential for preserving culture and social identities, whether individual or collective (Fatima and Nadeem 2025). It is noted that those who migrate from their hometown often struggle to maintain their heritage language (HL), especially when communicating with their children in this new environment. Studies have found that proficiency in the HL is associated with stronger family relationships and closer ties to the ethnic community (Cho 2000; Portes and Hao 2002; Lao and Lee 2009).
Given that Nigeria is a multilingual nation with English as the official language (Etim et al. 2025), many Anaañ families, especially those living outside Anaañ land (such as Cross River State), strive to maintain their HL and preserve their culture through language. The desire to preserve their HL often leads families to establish a family language policy (FLP), which outlines explicit and implicit language practices within the home. However, research indicates that negative societal views of certain linguistic groups can lead to the reduced use of heritage languages in public or private settings, as well as to an inability to implement the FLP (Polychroniadou and Panicacci 2024; Rzepnikowska 2016). Also, the widespread, continuous use of English and other factors have posed dangers and challenges to HLM. These challenges usually result in language attrition.
The Anaañ language is consolidated in eight Local Government Areas of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. These are Abak, Ukanafun, Oruk Anam, Etim Ekpo, Ika, Ikot Ekpene, Essien Udim and Obot Akara. The Anaañ language is the second dominant language in Akwa Ibom State after Ibibio; it has a linguistically homogeneous heritage. The language’s origin dates back to the origin of the people (speakers). However, some natives of Anaañ migrate to various parts of the world for various reasons. Due to the dominance of English and the host language, there is a trend of decline in the HL. According to Umunnakwe (2017), immigrants often face the complex task of retaining their HL and ensuring that their children can communicate effectively in it in their new environment. They also face the challenge of navigating the complex decision of language use, choosing between preserving their ethnic language, assimilating into the dominant culture, or embracing their bilingual or multilingual identity.
This study is significant because Anaañ, which is a Lower Cross language of Southern Nigeria, is experiencing rapid intergenerational attrition as younger speakers shift to English and Nigerian Pidgin in urban contexts. Documenting strategies of heritage language maintenance gives an empirical record of language use before further loss sets in, and preserves knowledge embedded in Anaañ that does not transfer readily to English. Conceptually, the study contributes to sociolinguistics by testing and extending social identity theory and domain analysis in a non-migrant, and intra-national multilingual setting.
This present study, therefore, identifies factors contributing to language attrition among Anaañ speakers, especially those residing in the study areas, and explores the reasons behind Anaañ–English bilinguals’ shift away from their HL. It further assesses the language use patterns of Anaañ speakers and the use of their HL vs. English. It investigates parents’ and children’s attitudes towards maintaining their HL and develops strategies to promote and sustain the language to reduce attrition. The study adopts the social identity framework of identity and indexicality, which holds that individuals’ drive for positive identity and esteem influences the social comparisons they make (Tajfel and Turner 1979). This framework is appropriate for analysing the motivations and strategies of Anaañ–English bilinguals in maintaining their HL to sustain cultural continuity in a foreign environment.

2. Literature Review and Methods

Research on HLM has become increasingly important due to the current migration discourse (Bilgory-Fazakas and Armon-Lotem 2025). Recent studies on bilingualism and multilingualism have highlighted the importance of context in language acquisition, with particular focus on the roles of family, education, and social environments in shaping language outcomes. This is especially true for HLM, where intergenerational family language practices play a crucial role (Juan-Garau 2014). HLM preserves cultural heritage, facilitates intergenerational bonds, and promotes cross-cultural understanding and respect (Inan and Harris 2025). According to Li and Lin (2025), the emotional significance of HLM in home and family contexts lies in its connection to identity, cultural legacy, and intergenerational relationships. These connections can elicit a mix of emotions, from pride in one’s cultural roots and hope for the language’s future to anxiety about its decline and guilt over not doing enough to pass it on. These emotions have a profound impact on families’ language choices, habits, and values, and are also reflective of their inner world.
Al-khresheh (2025) notes that HLM is a fundamental aspect of migration studies, as it plays a vital role in maintaining the continuity of cultural heritage across generations. The retention of HL in migrant populations is influenced by a complex interplay of factors, with community and family support playing a crucial role in creating linguistic environments that promote and normalise HL use. These linguistic spaces often emerge in settings such as religious ceremonies, cultural events, and community activities, highlighting the language’s practical and symbolic importance (Chondrogianni and Daskalaki 2023). Fisherman (2001) asserts that the preservation of HLs in multilingual communities is a deliberate effort of families and individuals to maintain their cultural and linguistic identity despite the prevalence of dominant languages. While immigrant families have traditionally borne the burden of HLM, a growing body of research argues that broader systemic support from institutions, policymakers, and the wider community is necessary (Inan et al. 2024). Al-khresheh (2025) observes that studies globally have demonstrated that HLs play a vital role in fostering self-esteem, cultural pride, and communal bonds.
Research suggests that, although the Anaañ language is deeply rooted in ethnic heritage, younger generations are showing signs of language attrition (Etim et al. 2018). This is why Anaañ bilinguals in the study area strive to preserve their cultural roots by maintaining their HL to prevent further attrition. Language attrition refers to the process of losing competence in a language that one has previously learned or spoken fluently (Pavelenko 2004; Sari 2021; Park 2018; Etim et al. 2025). Etim et al. (2018) observes that language attrition is characterised by changes in one’s native language that have either resulted in it falling into linguistic underuse or its use alongside the environment’s language. Language attrition is a non-pathological decline in a language that an individual has previously acquired (Kopke and Schmid 2004; Quan 2023). However, language attrition can also occur at a societal level, where a group of people may lose their primary or secondary language due to sociopolitical factors (Pelc 2001). Language attrition is divided into L1 (first language) loss in an L1 environment, L1 loss in an L2 (second language) environment, L2 loss in an L1 environment and L2 loss in an L2 environment (De Bot and Hulsen 2002). This study describes approaches to curb L1 loss in an L2 environment, which may be due to several factors. First language attrition refers to the decline or loss of certain L1 features, resulting in difficulties with producing, perceiving, or recognising specific linguistic elements, such as rules, words, or concepts, often due to the influence of a second language. L1 attrition is described as a progressive deterioration in L1 performance with an increase in L2 proficiency without pathological or age-related cognitive decline (Bermudez-Margaretto et al. 2021). Studies have shown that, due to the high prestige of English, most children whose L1 is Anaañ prefer to use English, which is their L2. Also, bilingual children in bilingual environments tend to exhibit some form of L1 attrition (Etim et al. 2018; Etim et al. 2025).

2.1. Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner 1979). This theory posits that an individual’s desire for positive identity and self-esteem plays a significant role in shaping their social comparisons (McKinley et al. 2014). It sees identity as being derived from group membership. This theory provides valuable insights into how cultural identity shapes collaboration and communication styles in bilingual/multilingual environments.
Tajfel adds that individuals’ sense of identity is tied to their group memberships, and if the current membership does not meet their needs for positive identity, they may seek alternative affiliations. However, Giles and Johnson’s ethnolinguistic identity theory emphasises that language is the key marker of social identity and group affiliations (Giles and Johnson 1987). Heller (1982, 1987, 1988) notes that language and ethnicity are intertwined, with ethnicity shaping an individual’s social experiences and opportunities. Shared language, values, and behaviour can reinforce ethnic identity and create a sense of community. Adding that language may ‘symbolise’ group identity and become an emblem of that identity, especially when there is contact with other groups whose ways of being are different. Ethnolinguistic identity theory (ELIT) draws heavily on the influential social identity theory of Tajfel and Turner (1979). It argues that people strive for a positive identity by making favourable comparisons with other groups. Language becomes a crucial aspect of this comparison when it is closely tied to a group’s identity. In intergroup encounters, individuals who value their language may employ strategies like language switching to maintain a sense of distinctiveness and positive identity. Hansen and Liu (1997) observe that if language is a salient marker of group membership, individuals may face linguistic adaptations that result in subtractive language erosion if a large number of members of a particular group assimilate into another group to achieve a more positive identity. According to Burns (2010), four core concepts from social identity theory are incorporated into ethnolinguistic identity theory. They are social categorisation, social identity, social comparison and psychological distinctiveness. Social categorisation accounts for an individual’s perspective of another as a member of one’s same group (ingroup); social identity accounts for an individual’s awareness of his or her own social group and the values associated with it; social comparison means the person will favour his or her own ingroup as more desirable for membership as compared to a perceived outgroups; and psychological distinctiveness is derived from a positive perception of one’s ingroup, which in turn contributes to a positive self-identification. By these causal factors, ELIT provides a more nuanced understanding of how language contributes to social identity. While various social factors contribute to identity, ELIT zeroes in on ethnic identification as a primary driver of linguistic representation (Burns 2010). Lindell et al. (2023) also add that studies on social and ethnic identity encompass three levels of analysis—individual, interactive, and societal and consider cognitive, evaluative, and emotional dimensions.

2.2. Methods

The study employed a qualitative approach in data collection, analysis and discussion. A purposive sampling technique was used to select participants who were suitable to provide the required information. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews with 40 participants (20 males, 20 females) who are Anaañ bilinguals living in Akpabuyo and Calabar South, of Cross River State. The participants were between 19 and 70 years old. The adult-age participants were selected because they could provide informed consent and offer valuable insights into language maintenance. The participants had diverse academic backgrounds, socio-economic statuses, religious affiliations and marital statuses. Their demographic attributes are detailed in Table 1 below. The participants were briefed on the research objectives and procedures, and they gave their written informed consent, indicating their willingness to participate. Those who could not write gave their consent verbally. They were assured anonymity and the right to withdraw at any time. Ethical approval for the research was granted by the Directorate of Research and Development, University of Calabar, with approval number: UC/DR&D/RERB/56.
The ethnographic approach of semi-structured interviews and participant observation was adopted to collect data. This was to provide rich, detailed, and in-depth insights into the participants’ thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Participant observation enabled the researchers to observe behaviour and interactions in natural settings. It gave us room to understand the social context and cultural norms that shape participants’ behaviour, attitude and motivation towards their language use. We scheduled weekly interviews with the participants at accessible locations, such as homes or offices, in their preferred language (Anaañ or English). Conversations and interactions were recorded. Each interview session lasted for approximately 45 to 50 min. Three research assistants who are conversant with ethnographic studies were recruited. During the interview sessions, we explored the factors influencing language attrition and examined the reasons for Anaañ–English bilinguals’ decreasing use of their heritage language. We asked to explore the contexts in which Anaañ bilinguals use their heritage language, including the locations, situations, and interlocutors. We explored participants’ attitudes towards language maintenance and potential strategies to support Anaañ language use and reduce language loss. We sought to investigate how maintaining their heritage language impacts their cultural identity and sense of belonging. The data was processed and categorised using coding, transcription, and translation, followed by thematic analysis to extract key themes.

3. Results

Given the significance of language in maintaining cultural identity, a qualitative, interpretive approach was adopted to explore the factors contributing to language attrition and motivations behind Anaañ bilinguals’ language shift. A thematic analysis of the data from semi-structured interviews and observation was employed as follows:

3.1. Attitude and Motivation

Attitudes are considered to be a key factor in determining success in language learning. The term’ attitude’ is used in different ways across fields, reflecting its complexity and nuance. In general, Kim and Merriam (2004) define attitude as a person’s overall emotional disposition or assessment (positive or negative, good or bad) towards themselves, others, objects, or events. Within the context of language, attitude refers to the complex of beliefs, opinions, and perspectives that learners hold about the target language culture, their own culture, and the language-learning process (López-Hernández 2007).
Language attitude is a crucial concept in language learning and teaching, as it significantly influences the learning process and outcomes. Learners with a positive attitude towards the target language are more likely to succeed. Etim et al. (2018) observe that a negative attitude towards a language can prove detrimental to the development or maintenance of that language, while those with a positive attitude towards their L1 tend to adopt an additive bilingualism approach. During the interviews, participants acknowledged that there is a prevalent negative attitude towards speaking the Anaañ language, which leads many native speakers to not prioritise its transmission to younger generations. A participant admitted that he prefers speaking English because he perceives it as more valuable than Anaañ (Male Part 4; age 30). Another respondent shared that she feels self-conscious speaking Anaañ in public, believing it to be a less esteemed language (Female Part 1; age 36).
Attitude and motivation are the two significant factors that influence language learning and use, with a positive attitude boosting motivation. Despite its widespread use in education and research, the concept of motivation remains ambiguously defined, with different psychological perspectives offering distinct interpretations (Dornyei 1994). Gadner (1985) defined motivation in language learning as the combination of effort, the desire to achieve the goal, and positive attitudes toward learning the language. Motivation is the goal-oriented, energising effort that individuals put into learning a language. A combination of poor motivation and negative attitudes toward language teaching and learning can create a highly complex environment for language development and maintenance. This was confirmed by some of the participants during the interview: “I expose my children early to the English language so that they will be fluent in it as they grow. I don’t want them to be influenced by the local language (Anaañ)” (Male Part 6; age 50).
Gardner’s theory identifies two types of motivation: integrative motivation, which involves a genuine interest in communicating with the target community and adopting its culture, and instrumental motivation, which is driven by practical benefits such as career advancement. Meanwhile, self-determination theory distinguishes between intrinsic motivation, driven by personal interest and enjoyment, and extrinsic motivation, driven by external factors such as rewards or recognition (Thuan 2021). Passion is the driving force behind motivation, stemming from a learner’s genuine interests and desires. Successful language learners recognise their strengths and weaknesses, using this self-awareness to optimise their learning (Oroujlou and Vahedi 2011). A lack of parental encouragement to speak the heritage language at home can undermine a child’s motivation to learn it. One respondent shared that her father’s preference for speaking English at home made neither she nor her siblings became fluent in Anaañ (Female Part 10; age 25). Research by Etim et al. (2025) highlights the significant role of peer pressure in discouraging the use of Anaañ, leading to language attrition characterised by a lack of motivation and negative attitudes towards the heritage language. This finding is supported by a participant’s account of being ridiculed by peers for speaking his heritage language in primary school. This had a lasting impact on his language use (Male Part 14; age 35).

3.2. Age at Onset of Bilingualism and Language Use

The onset of bilingualism is closely tied to language use patterns: early exposure to English can lead to a greater tendency to use English (Mikulski 2010). The age at which bilingualism begins is a crucial factor in language learning and attrition, with significant implications for psycholinguistics. For Anaañ children who acquire English as a second language, developing strong heritage language skills in the early years is crucial for long-term maintenance. Studies show that, in general, children develop strong heritage language abilities in their early years (Armon-Lotem et al. 2020). An early age of onset of bilingualism in English often leads to incomplete acquisition and/or language attrition in the heritage language. Also, increased exposure to English may result in a severe reduction in exposure to the heritage language. Mikulski (2010) observes that early childhood bilinguals may be more likely to experience incomplete acquisition or attrition compared to older bilinguals because the features of their L1 are still developing and may not be as strong. Participants confirmed that early exposure of children to L2 is a key factor in Anaañ language attrition. A participant revealed that he made a conscious decision to communicate with his children in English and encouraged all family members to do the same. This decision, according to him, was driven by his desire to spare his children the struggles he faced due to his own limited English proficiency. By doing so, he aimed to provide them with better opportunities and enhance their language skills from a young age (Male Part 15: age 55).
Findings reveal that varied language ideologies contribute to bilingual practices in families, with children often engaging in code-mixing and code-switching. A secondary school teacher participating in the study was asked to share her opinion on children who grow up as early bilinguals in the host environment. In response, the participant shared, “I’m not comfortable with children mixing multiple languages in an utterance or conversation, as it may affect their ability to speak their heritage language fluently and make it appear less valuable.” (Female Part 16; age 43). Another participant shared a different view on early bilingualism. She said, “I agree that our mother tongue is our identity, but English is crucial for education and opportunities. Therefore, I mix English and Anaañ with my grandchildren.” (Female Part 5; age 68). The ideologies reported by the above participant suggest that parents introduce their children and grandchildren to early bilingualism, which most times results in delayed language development in one or both languages and language mixing or code-switching.

3.3. How Is Heritage Language Maintenance (HLM) Practiced?

Maintaining a heritage language helps to shape one’s identity and connect with their cultural roots, providing access to parental guidance and social capital within the community. HLs play a crucial role in building trust and collaboration, especially in workplaces and communities. This was evident among participants with lower levels of formal education, who relied on a common language to tackle their problems and connect with other community members. A trader participant shared that when she visits the market and encounters an Anaañ speaker with whom she can converse in the language, she experiences increased trust and security, a reduced fear of being cheated, and an overall sense of being at home (Female Part 13; age 45). The use of HL facilitates teamwork and streamlines communication. A non-academic staff member of a university shared, ”I feel so relaxed to discuss with one of my colleagues whom we share the same heritage language, and we work better” (Female Part 17; age 60). During the interview sessions, families and individuals expressed an interest in promoting HLM as a means of preserving linguistic and cultural heritage in a milieu of unfamiliarity. They reported the benefits of using the HL and proposed methods to prevent further attrition and ensure sustained transmission. A medical lab scientist shared, “We have four children aged four, six, eight and ten. I insist that in our family we communicate in our heritage language and also encourage our children to do the same when they are together.” (Male Part 11; age 40). Another participant revealed that her children are not fluent in their HL because they speak English or the language of the host community when they are out in school or at the playground with friends. She added that they only speak their HL at home, which is not enough to sustain the language (Female Part 9; age 44). Sustained use of the HL within the home environment is essential for the development of children’s heritage language skills (Chumak-Horbatsch and Garg 2006; Tran 2010; Kilpi-Jakonen and Kwon 2023). With regard to the benefit enjoyed when speaking HLs, a young graduate participant shared, “I received a favour from my current employer because I heard that he is an Anaañ speaker, so I went to his office and greeted him with our HL and introduced myself. He was happy, and we communicated in our HL. We established a relationship, and I was eventually employed in the company” (Female Part 21; age 32).
A retired civil servant shared that ”During their Anaañ community gathering, he will propose that every family introduce a policy where they will decide on ways to maintain or bring back the HL in various families and instil the language into their children. They will decide on how to make Anaañ language compulsory in their homes” (Male Part 20; age 70). The participant’s proposal to introduce a policy within the Anaañ community is a commendable initiative, likely to mitigate language attrition and promote the continued use of the Anaañ language. The suggestion aligns with the family language policy (FLP) which aims to help families to maintain their HL. It constitutes the foundational linguistic environment within which the HL is maintained and transmitted across generations. The FLP concept provides a useful lens for examining how families shape language practices, management, and socialisation within their households (Curdt-Christiansen and Palviainen 2023; Piller and Gerber 2021; Schalley and Eisenchlas 2020; Fatima and Nadeem 2025). FLP is vital for maintaining the HL, as it sets the parameters for interactions between children and caregivers, thereby influencing children’s language development and acquisition (King et al. 2008; Cangelosi et al. 2024; Maseko 2025). FLP involves three interconnected domains: language ideology (parent beliefs), language practices (parental input and behaviour), and language management (efforts to shape language use) (Altaman et al. 2013). These domains can govern actual language practices and influence their use. The language choices made by a family are significantly influenced by the speaker’s perceived value of the language, which, in turn, is shaped by societal attitudes and ideologies (Cangelosi et al. 2024). Studies also suggest that parents who regard bilingualism and the preservation of linguistic heritage as valuable resources are more inclined to employ effective strategies to maintain the HL, such as the sustained use of the HL at home, the enrolment of children in heritage language courses, and opportunities for exposure to the HL (Bilgory-Fazakas and Armon-Lotem 2025; King et al. 2008). Community gatherings and cultural events offer an important opportunity for native speakers to engage with their heritage languages and connect with others who share a similar linguistic and cultural background. A participant remarked that, during their community events, they strive to use Anaañ consistently to allow younger members to develop the language skills in an immersive environment and foster a positive attitude towards it (Male Part 27; age 61). Respondents indicated that family members like parents, grandparents, and extended family should communicate in the heritage language to support learning and maintenance. Family gatherings emerge as key spaces for heritage language use, with extended family members acting as language custodians, facilitating language learning and acquisition. A participant shared an interesting experience, “I speak Anaañ fluently today because my grandmother only spoke Anaañ to us when we lived with her. Despite being a retired nurse and fluent in English, she insisted my mum speak only Anaañ to us” (Male Part 2; age 31). Another participant shared that he has a rule in his house: when the children and grandchildren are home on vacation, everyone speaks only Anaañ. No English is allowed—it makes the children learn and practice the language (Male Part 12; age 67).
A young, unmarried participant was interviewed about his opinion on strategies for preserving his heritage language and preventing its decline. He responded, “It’s my desire that Anaañ be the primary language spoken at home, allowing our children to learn it perfectly. I believe this is vital for maintaining our linguistic and cultural identity, and it’s a powerful symbol of our community’s resilience” (Male Part 22; age 37). Another participant who was asked a similar question shared that in her home, she creates opportunities to immerse herself in the Anaañ language, such as watching home movies, telling stories, and playing traditional music (Female Part 32; age 54).

3.4. The Role of Heritage Language Maintenance in Cultural Identity

The relationship between language and culture in indigenous communities is fundamental. Language enables communication, education, and economic exchange while culture defines identity and heritage. This interconnectedness necessitates a holistic approach that respects the integral role of language in conveying and preserving cultural heritage (Diko 2024; Gobodwana and Mtsi 2025). The interview sessions and observations revealed that HLM plays a significant role in preserving participants’ cultural identity. Beyond its communicative function, their native language (Anaañ) is essential for personal identity, cultural transmission, and the reinforcement of family and community ties. A participant farmer expressed that, despite leaving his village 25 years ago, speaking Anaañ still evokes a strong sense of connection to his culture and ancestors (Male Part 7; age 63). Another participant also shared that Anaañ is part of his identity and speaking the language keeps the ancestral roots alive even though speakers are far from home (Male Part 38; age 62). One participant revealed, “My native language is a fundamental part of my identity, and while I’m fluent in English, it doesn’t resonate with me the same way. Speaking my heritage language is the most natural way to bond with others from my tribe.” (Female Part 24; age 47). Responses from the above participants indicate their willingness to maintain their heritage language to avoid attrition. A civil servant participant shared, “My children lament that they struggle with humiliation and bullying when visiting home on vacation due to limited fluency in our native language. They also lack cultural awareness compared to their village peers” (Male Part 3; age 69). This shows how heritage language connects individuals to their cultural roots, even across generations, despite the challenges of immigration. From the above assertions, participants confirmed that heritage language is essential to their ethnic and cultural identities, regardless of proficiency. They expressed pride and connection to their linguistic heritage, seeing language as central to preserving culture and ethnicity.
Also, drawing from social identity theory, participants derive identity through shared linguistic features with people from the same cultural background and ethnic group living outside their ethnic environment. One respondent shared his thoughts on the intricacies of maintaining heritage language proficiency in a diverse cultural setting. According to her, “It is quite difficult to maintain one’s heritage language in the environment where I am because we interact daily in English and the Efik language, which is the host language. That makes it hard to still speak my heritage language fluently” (Female Part 18; age 42). By embracing cultural heritage and its connection to language, participants also acknowledged the contributions of cultural identity to heritage language maintenance. An English teacher participant shared that she tells stories to her children in their native language and plays traditional Anaañ dance and music for them from time to time. These cultural activities motivate speaking and help maintain the HL (Female Part 29; age 51).

4. Discussion

The study draws on social identity theory, which holds that individuals and groups are defined by their affiliations with their groups. Language use is tied to the social identities of speakers, listeners, and learners, particularly in contexts like family heritage. In other words, the connection between language use and social identity plays a key role in driving an individual’s language learning motivations and decisions (Bucholtz and Hall 2004; Dos Santos 2021). The four anthropological elements of practice, indexicality, ideology, and performance, associated with language and social identity (Bucholtz and Hall 2004), were explored to investigate strategies for maintaining Anaañ heritage language among bilinguals in Akpabuyo and Calabar South of Cross River State to mitigate language loss.
Attitude and motivation are the disposition and the drive that influence the willingness of Anaañ speakers to maintain and transmit their HL. Age-at-onset bilingualism captures how children are exposed to early bilingualism, which oftentimes affects their heritage language development. The practice of HLM exposes some of the strategies for maintaining HL as suggested by the participants. The role of HLM in cultural identity brings about family and community ties especially those residing in a foreign land.
The study found that Anaañ speakers in the study areas are aware of the threat to their language and identify factors that could lead to its decline. This supports Etim et al. (2018)’s findings that younger generations are experiencing language attrition, despite Anaañ’s strong cultural roots. The study found that Anaañ speakers often express a negative attitude towards their heritage language, which is often extended to their children. This mirrors Olawe’s (2022) findings that many researchers and linguists are concerned about the trend of people abandoning their mother tongues and their impact on Nigerian languages. Due to a lack of motivation and a negative attitude towards heritage languages, the study observes that parents expose their children to early-onset bilingualism, where they struggle to balance multiple languages (heritage language, host language, and official language). This results in limited proficiency in the heritage language. Over time, this can make the heritage language seem less important. This is exemplified by the account of the female participant, age 43, who shared, “I’m not comfortable with children mixing multiple languages in an utterance or conversation, as it may affect their ability to speak their heritage language fluently and make it appear less valuable.” (Female Part 8; age 43).
The study shows the significance of grandparents and elder family members in heritage language preservation, aligning with a previous study (Fatima and Nadeem 2025) that maintains that parents and grandparents facilitate language and cultural learning through everyday interactions, shared activities, and storytelling. The findings also reveal a strong correlation between ethnic identity, family dynamics and language practices, which contributes to heritage language proficiency, preference, and maintenance. The study’s evidence shows that maintaining the Anaañ language boosts cultural identity and connection. Despite some Anaañ speakers’ negative attitudes towards their HL, others value it, keep it alive, and are ready to pass it to the future generations. Some participants were at ease speaking Anaañ and enjoyed benefits such as bonding with fellow Anaañ speakers. Participants proposed approaches for maintaining their HL. One of these was family language policies, which resonates with the study by Cangelosi et al. (2024), which notes that a well-defined family language policy is essential for heritage language maintenance as it sets the tone for language use and impacts children’s language development. Speaking the HL in community gatherings, promoting positive language attitudes, and creating language immersion opportunities were other strategies for HLM recommended by participants. These approaches align with Al-khresheh (2025)’s view that, building on existing research, practical measures are needed to support HLM among migrants.

5. Conclusions

The study explored strategies for maintaining Anaañ as a heritage language among natives living outside their homeland, specifically in the Akpabuyo and Calabar South Local Government Areas of Cross River State, to curb language loss. The study used semi-structured interviews to collect data for the analysis. The findings corroborate and extend knowledge of the factors contributing to the Anaañ language’s decline, and investigate possible maintenance approaches. Using a social identity framework, the study investigates participants’ attitudes towards their heritage language, revealing insights into language use and cultural–linguistic identity. Despite the decline in the Anaañ language, the data revealed that participants still nurture their cultural identity through language use in family and community settings. The findings align with the study of Polinsky and Scontras (2020), who echo that global research has emphasised the importance of heritage languages in maintaining cultural identity and fostering community unity. The study has galvanised the Anaañ speakers in the study areas to prioritise their heritage language, ensuring its transmission to future generations and enforcing their cultural pride. It has sparked a sense of urgency to maintain their heritage language.
The study recommends that, to build on these findings, policymakers should prioritise resources such as language-learning tools and cultural programmes to support heritage language maintenance in families and communities.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.E.E. and J.T.T.; methodology, V.E.E.; software, V.E.E.; validation, V.E.E., and J.T.T.; formal analysis, V.E.E.; investigation, V.E.E.; resources, J.T.T.; data curation, J.T.T.; writing—original draft preparation, V.E.E.; writing—review and editing, J.T.T.; visualization, V.E.E.; supervision, J.T.T.; project administration, V.E.E.; funding acquisition, V.E.E. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the University of Calabar Research Ethical Review Board(protocol code UC/DR&D/RERB/56 and date of approval: 10 January 2026).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
HLMHeritage language maintenance
HLHeritage language
FLPFamily language policy

References

  1. Al-khresheh, Mohammad Hamad. 2025. The role of heritage language maintenance in shaping identity and cohesion among migrant populations: A case study of Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Population Studies 14: 7070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Altaman, Carmit, Zhanna Burstein Feldman, Dafna Yitzhaki, Sharon Armon Lotem, and Joel Walters. 2013. Family Language Policies reported language use and proficiency in Russian-Hebrew bilingual children in Israel. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 35: 216–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Annet, Kakembo Aisha. 2024. Language preservation: Strategies for indigenous Languages. Newport International Journal of Current Issues in Arts and Management (NIJCIAM) 5: 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Armon-Lotem, Sharon, Karen Rose, and Carmit Altman. 2020. The development of English as a heritage language: The role of chronological age and age of onset of bilingualism. First Language 41: 67–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bermudez-Margaretto, Beatriz, Federico Gallo, Mikhail Pokhoday, Yury Shtyrov, Hamutal Kreiner, and Andriy Myachykov. 2021. Understanding Language Attrition through orthography. Languages 6: 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bilgory-Fazakas, Orsolya, and Sharon Armon-Lotem. 2025. Resident heritage language maintenance: The interplay of family, culture, and pragmatic choices. Frontiers in Psychology 16: 1550704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall. 2004. Language identity. In A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology. Edited by Alessandro Duranti. London: Blackwell, pp. 369–94. [Google Scholar]
  8. Burns, Michael. 2010. Ethnolinguistic Identity Theory. In Encyclopedia of Identity. Atlanta: SAGE, vol. 1, pp. 262–82. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cangelosi, Martina, Claudia Borghetti, and Paola Bonifacci. 2024. How Parents’ perceived value of the Heritage Language predicts their children’s skills. Languages 9: 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cho, Grace. 2000. The role of heritage language in social interactions and relationships: Reflections from a language minority. Bilingual Research Journal 24: 369–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chondrogianni, Vasiliki, and Evangelia Daskalaki. 2023. Heritage language use in the country of residence matters for language maintenance, but short visits to the homeland can boost heritage language outcomes. Frontiers in Language Sciences 2: 1230408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chumak-Horbatsch, Roma, and Suchi Garg. 2006. Mmmm… I like English! Linguistic behaviours of Ukrainian-English bilingual children. Psychology of Language and Communication 10: 3–25. [Google Scholar]
  13. Curdt-Christiansen, Xiao Lan, and Asa Palviainen. 2023. Ten years later: What has become of FLP? Lang Policy 22: 379–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. De Bot, Kees, and Madeleine Hulsen. 2002. Language attrition: Tests, self-assessments and perceptions. International Journal of Bilingualism 8: 321–45. [Google Scholar]
  15. Diko, Mlamli. 2024. The Sociocultural significance of naming practices among the amaXhosa. Nomina practices among the Amazulu. Nomina Africana: Journal of African Onomastics 38: 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Diskin, Chloe. 2020. New speakers in the Irish context: Heritage language maintenance among multilingual migrants in Dublin, Ireland. Frontiers in Education 4: 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Dornyei, Zoltan. 1994. Motivation and motivating in the Foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal 78: 273–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Dos Santos, Luis Miguel. 2021. The Relationship between Social Identity and Foreign Language Learning Motivation: The sustainability of Heritage Language Learners. Sustainability 13: 13102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Duke, Emmanuel Orok, Victoria Enefiok Etim, and Gregory Ajima Onah. 2024. Intricacies of Religious language in shaping the mindset of adherents during COVID-19: A study of Churches in Calabar. International Bulletin of Mission Research 48: 226–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Etim, Victoria Enefiok, Akumjika Chikamma Michael, and Leonard Odum Ojorgu. 2025. Morphosyntactic Attrition on the L1 of Anaañ Bilingual Children in contact with English Language. Journal of African Languages and Literary Studies 6: 97–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Etim, Victoria Enefiok, and Emmanuel Akaninyene Okon. 2023. Acquisition of Negation in the Anaañ Child language. British Journal of English Linguistics 11: 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Etim, Victoria Enefiok, Bassey Andian Okon, and Margaret Mary Okon. 2018. First language Attrition of lexical structures in a contact situation with English: A study among Anaañ Bilingual children. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal 5: 555–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Fatima, Shameen, and Muhammad Umar Nadeem. 2025. Family language policy and heritage language transmission in Pakistan-the intersection of family dynamics, ethnic identity and cultural practices on language proficiency and maintenance. Frontiers in Psychology 16: 1560755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Fisherman, Joshua A. 2001. Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Multilingual Matters & Channel View Publications. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Gadner, Robert C. 1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning. London: Edward Amold. [Google Scholar]
  26. Giles, Howard, and Patrjcia Johnson. 1987. Ethnolinguistic identity theory: A social psychological approach to language maintenance. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 68: 69–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gobodwana, Anele, and Ncedo Mtsi. 2025. A sociocultural investigation of culture and language change among amaxhosa in Rural and Urban communities. Journal of African Languages and Literary Studies 6: 257–75. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hakim qizi, Choriyeva Mohina. 2025. Language Preservation efforts in the age of Globalisation. Western European Journal of Linguistics and Education 3: 47–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Halsted, Marco. 2015. Language loss and the implications for identity. Language & Intercultural Communication 15: 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hansen, Jette G., and Jun Liu. 1997. Social identity and Language: Theoretical and Methodological issues. TESOL Quarterly 31: 567–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Heller, Monica. 1982. Language, Ethnicity and Politics in Quebec. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA. [Google Scholar]
  32. Heller, Monica. 1987. The role of language in the formation of ethnic identity. In Children’s Ethnic Socialization. Edited by Jean S. Phinney and Mary Jane Rotheram. Newbury Park: Sage, pp. 180–200. [Google Scholar]
  33. Heller, Monica. 1988. Codeswitching: Anthropological and Sociolinguistic Perspectives. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [Google Scholar]
  34. Inan, Recep, Nihal Nisanci, and Sarah Harris. 2024. Bilingual Parenting and Language attitudes: A longitudinal Study. Journal of Multilingual Family 12: 22–41. [Google Scholar]
  35. Inan, Seyma, and Yvette Renee Harris. 2025. Beyond the home: Rethinking heritage language maintenance as a collective responsibility. Frontiers in Psychology 10: 1616510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Juan-Garau, Maria. 2014. Heritage Language use and maintenance in Multilingual Communities. Applied Linguistics Review 5: 425–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kilpi-Jakonen, Elina, and Hye Won Kwon. 2023. The Behavioural and Mental Health Benefits of speaking the Heritage Language within immigrant families: The Moderating Role of Family Relations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 52: 2158–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Kim, Ahjin, and Sharan B. Merriam. 2004. Motivations for Learning Among Older Adults in the Learning in Retirement Institute. Athens: Department of Adult Education, Educational Gerontology, The University of Georgia. [Google Scholar]
  39. King, Kendall A., Lyn Fogle, and Aubrey Logan-Terry. 2008. Family language policy. Language and Linguistics Compass 2: 00076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kopke, Barbara, and Monika S. Schmid. 2004. Language Attrition: The next phase. In First Language Attrition: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Methodological Issues. Brooklyn: John Benjamin, pp. 1–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Lao, Ravy S., and Jin Sook Lee. 2009. Heritage language maintenance and use among 1.5 Generation Khmer College students. Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement 4: 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Li, Guofang, and Zhen Lin. 2025. The Emotional work of Heritage Language Maintenance: Insights from a Longitudinal study of Chinese-Canadian Bilingual Parenting. Education Sciences 15: 816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lindell, Marina, Marina Näsman, Fredrica Nyqvist, Siv Björklund, Mikael Nygård, and Jessica Hemberg. 2023. The role of ethnolinguistic identity, vitality and trust in perceived language climate: The case of Swedish speakers in Finland. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 46: 1157–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. López-Hernández, Yezenia. 2007. Attitudes of Basic Track Students Towards English at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez. Mayagüez: University of Puerto Rico. [Google Scholar]
  45. Maseko, Busani. 2025. Coloniality, Aspiration and Family Language Policy: Understanding Parents and Caregivers’ Complex Disposition towards Children’s Translanguaging. Journal of African Languages and Literary Studies 6: 113–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mathuswamy, Vimala Venugopal. 2023. Use of heritage language in Immigrant families to strengthen family relationships and adolescents’ ethnic identities: The case of Arab Immigrants. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics 9: 106–17. [Google Scholar]
  47. McKinley, Christopher J., Dana Mastro, and Katie M. Warber. 2014. Social Identity Theory as a framework for understanding the effects of exposure to positive media images of self and others on intergroup outcomes. International Journal of Communication 8: 1049–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mikulski, Ariana M. 2010. Age of onset of Bilingualism, language use and the volitional subjunctive in heritage learners of Spanish. Heritage Language Journal 7: 28–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Olawe, Opeyemi Emmanuel. 2022. Implications of the Negative Attitude towards Nigerian indigenous languages onNational Development. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research 10: 60–73. [Google Scholar]
  50. Oroujlou, Nasser, and Majid Vahedi. 2011. Motivation, attitude, and language learning. International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology 29: 994–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Park, Eun Sung. 2018. Language Attrition. In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Pavelenko, Aneta. 2004. L2 influence and L1 attrition in adult bilingualism. In First Language Attrition: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Methodological Issues. Edited by Monika. S. Schmid, Barbara Kopke, Merel Keijzer and Lina Weilemar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 47–59. [Google Scholar]
  53. Pelc, Linda A. 2001. L1 Lexical, Morphological and Morphosyntactic Attrition in Greek—English Bilinguals. In Cuny Academic Works. New York: City University of New York. Available online: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1782/ (accessed on 5 February 2026).
  54. Piller, Ingrid, and Liva Gerber. 2021. Family language policy between the bilingual advantage and the monolingual mindset. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 24: 622–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Polinsky, Maria, and Gregory Scontras. 2020. Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23: 4–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Polychroniadou, Vasiliki, and Alex Panicacci. 2024. When cultural antagonism does not align with language bias: The sociolinguistic, cultural, and emotional experiences of German immigrants in post-crisis Greece. Ampersand 14: 100206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Portes, Alejandro, and Lingxin Hao. 2002. The price of uniformity: Language, family and personality adjustment in the immigrant second generation. Ethnic and Racial Studies 25: 889–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Quan, Li. 2023. An overview of International Research on Language Attrition. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics 5: 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Rzepnikowska, Alina E. 2016. Convival cultures in multicultural societies: Narratives of Polish migrants in Britain and Spain. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. [Google Scholar]
  60. Sari, Dini Candra Purnama. 2021. English language attrition among Bilingual children returning from an English-speaking country. Language Horizon Journal of Language Studies 9: 28–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Schalley, Andrea C., and Susana A. Eisenchlas. 2020. Handbook of Home Language Maintenance and Development: Social and Affective Factors. Boston and Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, vol. 18. [Google Scholar]
  62. Tajfel, Henri, and John C. Turner. 1979. An integrative Theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Edited by William G. Austin and Stephen Worchel. Monterey: Brooks/Cole, pp. 33–47. [Google Scholar]
  63. Thuan, Pham D. 2021. Attitude and Motivation in language learning: A review. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics 3: 64–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tran, Van C. 2010. English gain vs Spanish Loss? Language assimilation among second-generation Latinos in young adulthood. Social Forces 89: 257–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Umunnakwe, Ngozi. 2017. Patterns of language use among immigrant children from Anglophone African countries living in Botswana. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal 4: 52–63. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Demographic attributes of participants.
Table 1. Demographic attributes of participants.
ParticipantSexAgeQualificationOccupation
Part 1F36Bachelor’s DegreeTeacher
Part 2M67Master’s DegreePublic Servant
Part 3M69Ph.D.Lecturer
Part 4M30Bachelor’s DegreeCivil Servant
Part 5F68Non-formal Edu.Farmer
Part 6M50Master’s DegreePublic Servant
Part 7M63Ph.D.Public Servant
Part 8F43Non-formal Edu.Business
Part 9F44Bachelor’s DegreeTeacher
Part 10F25UndergraduateStudent
Part 11M40Bachelor’s DegreeLab Scientist
Part 12M67Master’s DegreeCivil Servant
Part 13F45SSCETrader
Part 14M35Bachelor’s DegreeBusiness
Part 15M55Ph.D.Lecturer
Part 16F43Bachelor’s DegreeTrader
Part 17F60SSCECleaner
Part 18F42PostgraduateStudent
Part 19F50Non-formal Edu.Farmer
Part 20M70Master’s DegreeRetired Civil Servant
Part 21F32PostgraduateStudent
Part 22M37PostgraduateStudent
Part 23M57Non-formalTrader
Part 24F47Bachelor’s DegreeTrader
Part 25M52Non-formal Edu.Business
Part 26F66Non-formal Edu. Farmer
Part 27M61Bachelor’s DegreeChief
Part 28M60Non-formal Edu.Business
Part 29F51Bachelor’s DegreeTeacher
Part 30F55Bachelor’s DegreeNurse
Part 31M67Bachelor’s DegreeTeacher
Part 32F54Bachelor’s DegreePublic Servant
Part 33F67Master’s DegreeBusiness
Part 34M49Bachelor’s DegreeCivil Servant
Part 35F48SSCESeamstress
Part 36M50Bachelor’s DegreePublic Servant
Part 37F49Bachelor’s DegreeTeacher
Part 38M62Bachelor’s DegreeBusiness
Part 39M70Bachelor’s DegreeRetired teacher
Part 40F65Bachelor’s DegreeRetired Civil Servant
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Etim, V.E.; Tyoh, J.T. Strategies for Heritage Language Maintenance: Mitigating Language Attrition Among Anaañ—English Bilinguals of Southern Nigeria. Genealogy 2026, 10, 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy10020072

AMA Style

Etim VE, Tyoh JT. Strategies for Heritage Language Maintenance: Mitigating Language Attrition Among Anaañ—English Bilinguals of Southern Nigeria. Genealogy. 2026; 10(2):72. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy10020072

Chicago/Turabian Style

Etim, Victoria Enefiok, and Jude Terkaa Tyoh. 2026. "Strategies for Heritage Language Maintenance: Mitigating Language Attrition Among Anaañ—English Bilinguals of Southern Nigeria" Genealogy 10, no. 2: 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy10020072

APA Style

Etim, V. E., & Tyoh, J. T. (2026). Strategies for Heritage Language Maintenance: Mitigating Language Attrition Among Anaañ—English Bilinguals of Southern Nigeria. Genealogy, 10(2), 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy10020072

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop