Advertisement

Belonging: Transnationalism, Language and Identity

Chapter
  • 157 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life book series (PSFL)

Abstract

In this chapter, we examine a range of topics from several domains of our conceptual model of integration: transnationalism, language use, and national and religious identities. By bringing them together under the heading of ‘belonging’, we respond to the need to interrogate constructions of the politics of belonging and illustrate once more the associations and disjunctions that can exist between processes of integration in different domains and at different levels. Our data also analysis sheds light on a ‘paradox of integration’, in which British South Asian’s experiences of discrimination may lead them to question the meaning of Britishness, and in which perceived inequity of immigration regulations may play a role.

References

  1. Abbasi-Shavazi, M. J., Glazebrook, D., Jamshidiha, G., Mahmoudian, H., & Sadeghi, R. (2008). Second-generation Afghans in Iran: Integration, identity and return. Case Study Series. Kabul: Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit.Google Scholar
  2. Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 167–191.Google Scholar
  3. Arel, D. (2001). Language categories in censuses: Backward- or forward-looking? In D. Kertzer & D. Arel (Eds.), Census and identity: The politics of race, ethnicity, and language in national censuses (pp. 92–120). New Perspectives on Anthropological and Social Demography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Basch, L., Glick Schiller, N., & Szanton Blanc, C. (1993). Nations unbound. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Blommaert, J. (2006). Language policy and national identity. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 238–254). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. Bolognani, M. (2014). Visits to the country of origin: How second‐generation British Pakistanis shape transnational identity and maintain power asymmetries. Global Networks, 14(1), 103–120.Google Scholar
  7. Carol, S., Ersanilli, E., & Wagner, M. (2014). Spousal choice among the children of Turkish and Moroccan immigrants in six European countries: Transnational spouse or co-ethnic migrant? International Migration Review, 48(2), 387–414.Google Scholar
  8. Casey, L. (2016). The Casey review: A review into opportunity and integration. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.Google Scholar
  9. Charsley, K. (2005a). Vulnerable brides and transnational Ghar Damads: Gender, risk and ‘adjustment’ among Pakistani marriage migrants to Britain. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 12(2–3), 381–406.Google Scholar
  10. Charsley, K. (2005b). Unhappy husbands: Masculinity and migration in transnational Pakistani marriages. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 11(1), 85–105.Google Scholar
  11. Charsley, K. (2013). Transnational Pakistani connections: Marrying ‘back home’. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Charsley, K. (2018). ‘A first generation in every generation?’ Spousal immigration in the Casey Review and Integration Strategy Green Paper. Discover Society. https://discoversociety.org/2018/05/01/a-first-generation-in-every-generation-spousal-immigration-in-the-casey-review-and-integrated-communities-strategy-green-paper/. Accessed 5 July 2019.
  13. Charsley, K., & Bolognani, M. (2019). Marrying ‘in’/marrying ‘out’? Blurred boundaries in British Pakistani marriage choices. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1625131.
  14. Charsley, K., & Liversage, A. (2015). Silenced husbands: Muslim marriage migration and masculinity. Men and Masculinities, 18(4), 489–508.Google Scholar
  15. De Leeuw, M., & Van Wichelen, S. (2012). Civilizing migrants: Integration, culture and citizenship. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 15(2), 195–210.Google Scholar
  16. Di Leonardo, M. (1987). The female world of cards and holidays: Women, families and the work of kinship. Signs, 12(3), 440–453.Google Scholar
  17. Erdal, M. B. (2012). A place to stay in Pakistan: Why migrants build houses in their country of origin. Population, Space and Place, 18(5), 629–641.Google Scholar
  18. Erdal, M. B. (2013). Migrant transnationalism and multi-layered integration: Norwegian-Pakistani migrants’ own reflections. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(6), 983–999.Google Scholar
  19. Erdal, M. B., & Oeppen, C. (2013). Migrant balancing acts: Understanding the interactions between integration and transnationalism. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(6), 867–884.Google Scholar
  20. Heath, A. (2013). Understanding political change: The British voter 1964–1987. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  21. Heckmann, F., et al. (2006). Integration and integration policies: IMISCOE network feasibility study. Amsterdam: IMISCOE.Google Scholar
  22. Hooghiemstra, E. (2001). Migrants, partner selection and integration: Crossing borders Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 32(4), 601–626.Google Scholar
  23. Jenkins, R. (2008). Social identity. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Joppke, C. (2009). Limits of integration policy: Britain and her Muslims. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(3), 453–472.Google Scholar
  25. Karlsen, S. I. (2016). How British do British Muslims feel? The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-british-do-british-muslims-feel-46431. Accessed 24 July 2019.
  26. Liversage, A., & Rytter, M. (2015). A cousin marriage equals a forced marriage: Regulations, discourses and strategies of transnational consanguineous marriages in Denmark. In A. Shaw & A. E. Raz, Cousin marriages: Between tradition, genetic risk and cultural change (pp. 130–153). Oxford and New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  27. Migrant Rights Network. (2014). The family migration income threshold: Pricing UK workers out of a family life. London: Migrants’ Rights Network. https://migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2017/02/23/family-migration-income-threshold-pricing-uk-workers-family-life/. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  28. Mohammad, R. (2015). Transnational shift: Marriage, home and belonging for British Pakistani women. Social and Cultural Geography, 16(6), 593–614.Google Scholar
  29. Nandi, A., & Platt, L. (2015). Patterns of minority and majority identification in a multicultural society. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(15), 2615–2634.Google Scholar
  30. Neveu Kringelbach, H. (2013). ‘Mixed marriage’, citizenship and the policing of intimacy in contemporary France (IMI Oxford Working Papers Paper 77). http://neveukringelbach.org/papers/IMI_NeveuKringelbach2013.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  31. Portes, A., Escobar, C., & Arana, R. (2008). Bridging the gap: Transnational and ethnic organisations in the political incorporation of immigrants in the United States. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 31(6), 1056–1090.Google Scholar
  32. Portes, A., Guarnizo, L. E., & Haller, W. J. (2002). Transnational entrepreneurs: An alternative form of immigrant economic adaptation. American Sociological Review, 67(2), 278–298.Google Scholar
  33. Qureshi, K. (2015). Beyond code-switching: young Punjabi Sikhs in Britain. In K. Jacobsen & K. Myrvold (Eds.), Young Sikhs in a global world. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Rytter, M. (2012). Between preferences: Marriage and mobility among Danish Pakistani youth. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 18(3), 572–590.Google Scholar
  35. Sanders, D., Fisher, S. D., Heath, A., & Sobolewska, M. (2014). The democratic engagement of Britain’s ethnic minorities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37(1), 120–139.Google Scholar
  36. Schinkel, W. (2011). The nationalization of desire: Transnational marriage in Dutch culturist integration discourse. Focaal—Journal of Global and Historical Anthropology, 2011(59), 99–106.Google Scholar
  37. Schinkel, W. (2018). Against ‘immigrant integration’: For an end to neocolonial knowledge production. Comparative migration studies, 6(1), 31.Google Scholar
  38. Scholten, P. W. A., Entzinger, H., Kofman, E., Hollomey, C., Lechner, C., Vacchelli, E., & Kraler, A. (2012). Integration from abroad? Perceptions and impacts of pre-entry tests for third country nationals. PROCINT WP4. http://research.icmpd.org/fileadmin/Research-Website/Project_material/PROSINT/Reports/WP4_CompRep_Final_submitted.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2019.
  39. Snel, E., Engbersen, G., & Leerkes, A. (2006). Transnational involvement and social integration. Global Networks, 6(3), 285–308.Google Scholar
  40. Sumption, M., & Vargas-Silva, C. (2019). Love is not all you need: Income requirement for visa sponsorship of foreign family members. Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy, 2(1–2), 62–76.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, R. J., Forsythe-Brown, I., Lincoln, K. D., & Chatters, L. M. (2017). Extended family support networks of Caribbean Black adults in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 38(4), 522–546.Google Scholar
  42. Tolsma, J., Lubbers, M., & Gijsberts, M. (2012). Education and cultural integration among ethnic minorities and natives in the Netherlands: A test of the integration paradox. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(5), 793–813.Google Scholar
  43. The Migration Observatory. (2016). The minimum income requirement for non-EEA family members in the UK. Accessed 25 July 2019.Google Scholar
  44. Warriner, D. S. (2007). Language learning and the politics of belonging: Sudanese women refugees becoming and being “American”. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 38(4), 343–359.Google Scholar
  45. Werbner, P. (1994). Diaspora and millenium: British Pakistani local-global fabulations of the Gulf War. In A. S. Ahmed & H. Donnan (Eds.), Islam, globalization and postmodernity (pp. 209–232). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Belonging and the politics of belonging. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(3), 197–214.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Sociology, Politics and International StudiesUniversity of BristolBristolUK
  2. 2.BristolUK
  3. 3.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Centre on Migration, Policy and SocietyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations